krichman

44 ms·

331.
by krichman 14y ago
The solution appears to be sending cash in the mail. That's a bit less than ideal.
332.
by krichman 14y ago
Of course not, but only because the poors aren't allowed in their country clubs.
333.
by krichman 14y ago
Not in all cases you wouldn't. Ideally we'd like the prices to go way up for these kinds of extortionists while remaining low for individuals who were actually wronged by a large corporation.
334.
by krichman 14y ago
I take it by your flippancy that you disagree. Am I correct in assuming that you mean to insinuate that removing the profit incentive for Big Pharma executives (cancel patents) without reducing the salaries of researchers (use the saved cos
335.
by krichman 14y ago
They might cover it with a blur filter and require you to register on their site to read it.
336.
by krichman 14y ago
That's exactly how these OOP languages get translated into C, so the difference would be having a method dispatch table per class or having a global system for multiple dispatch.
337.
by krichman 14y ago
That's disappointing. They had a package that let me test programs I developed on my own device.
338.
by krichman 14y ago
"Our early employees have stock amounts disproportionate to how I value them (T n T )"
339.
by krichman 14y ago
You are the one that stated absolutely you shouldn't listen to random opinions, with rhetoric such as "If he _wants_ other people's opinions, he'll ask for them" and "developers can also intend for their software to be "widely-used" but onl
340.
by krichman 14y ago
Objective C is brilliant, it's one of the few things I actually enjoy about Apple's ecosystem. This is because it stole ideas from Smalltalk, which is also brilliant. I doubt there are many people who hate it rationally, but I'd love to hav
341.
by krichman 14y ago
It's contradictory that you would do whatever you like regardless of anyone else's opinions, ever and expect your software to be used by a large number of people. Obviously you aren't obligated to accomodate anyone when you are doing your o
342.
by krichman 14y ago
I will have to check this out! I've been wishing for bind on other systems for a while now, but didn't think to check for it.
343.
by krichman 14y ago
> Because their opinion gets any legitimacy only by what you paid for it, either by money or work. I'm sorry, but that is just fallacious. There are plenty of people who aren't involved in any given project, but would still be qualified
344.
by krichman 14y ago
Is this like the bind command in plan9, and is it available for Debian-based Linuxes?
345.
by krichman 14y ago
ARC is terrible, I've had far more errors with it than I ever did without.
346.
by krichman 14y ago
You might also want to cull backwards polygons or use a depth buffer.
347.
by krichman 14y ago
and have challenging/interesting projects
348.
by krichman 14y ago
Cognitive dissonance? I think those who claim that IP's aren't identity would still claim that with regards to Warner Brothers. It's just delightful schadenfreude that claiming that it is identity would now implicate Warner Brothers. You ca
349.
by krichman 14y ago
You might not be naive, but you are probably mistaking the value of allowing sophisticated users to try in this way versus the value of getting an email that you can send weekly updates to.
350.
by krichman 14y ago
Those two websites are case studies of the Peter Principle.
351.
by krichman 14y ago
I find there's no point in participating in SO beyond a certain level of ability. If you ask a truly difficult question, the odds of getting an answer from someone who knows what they are talking about is not very good. Meanwhile, any sort
352.
by krichman 14y ago
Google routinely hands out the entirety of your gmail data to the US. I don't think that's really doing their best to side with users.
353.
by krichman 14y ago
This is irrelevant to whether they are allowed to support the EFF or not.
354.
by krichman 14y ago
> The usual way to address this is to add additional, easy to prove thresholds that let a case be dismissed without consideration of involved questions. This, absolutely. Giving defendants an inexpensive way to challenge patents which s
355.
by krichman 14y ago
He's ruining small companies using a tactic that is objectively unfair, and then using his ill-gotten gains to sate his own gluttony. He'd need to have a long handlebar moustache and tie heroines to railroad tracks to be more of a cartoon v
356.
by krichman 14y ago
Bold? He's already popular on Reddit and this will double or treble the magnitude of that.
357.
by krichman 14y ago
US healthcare has an abysmal cost-to-benefit ratio in comparison with most of Europe.
358.
by krichman 14y ago
UIAM you can't publish an advertisement with someone in it until they sign a model release form.
359.
by krichman 14y ago
> Nothing prevents you from representing yourself. If you have foolishly decided to conduct business without creating a corporate entity to protect your personal assets from lawsuits, then yes you may. If you have created a corporate en
360.
by krichman 14y ago
I like it because "literally" is being used hyperbolically, therefore in those cases it is describing the opposite of itself.

More ›