wissler

43 ms·

391.
by wissler 14y ago
If you have a rational argument that proves that debuggers are only useful on poorly designed code then I would certainly be interested in hearing it. It is true that the worse the code the more frequently you need to debug, but that's a qu
392.
by wissler 14y ago
Taking personal pride in not using a debugger is a bad idea. Sometimes it's the right tool for the job, and if your picking it up makes you feel dirty, you're only handicapping yourself.
393.
by wissler 14y ago
"American business has been the greatest engine for technological progress the world has ever seen" That doesn't mean it couldn't be far better. Which is the point Kay was getting at. Lose your vision and striving for the ideal, and you ine
394.
by wissler 14y ago
"It's surprising how rarely we encounter good critics in our lives,..." It's not surprising at all. Rarely do people really want to be corrected. Indeed, the more they need to be corrected, the less they want to hear about it.
395.
by wissler 14y ago
How exactly is where I went to school relevant? Where did you go to school? Did they teach logic?
396.
by wissler 14y ago
Colleges do not teach political theories contrary to the current mythology of our age, on the contrary, they pimp the theories favorable to the government they exist under.
397.
by wissler 14y ago
You need to study some actual political theory, not pop culture mythology.
398.
by wissler 14y ago
If you are genuinely curious then read some political theory. Such as John Locke's second treatise on government, and "For Individual Rights" (see Amazon).
399.
by wissler 14y ago
"I don't get it... " Sorry, I don't have time to put in the requisite political theory, but in short, what gives the "public" the right to claim the entire continent, or indeed if you look at the issue correctly, THE ENTIRE PLANET unto thei
400.
by wissler 14y ago
You use "agreed" in a very slippery way. Agreement implies consent, but few consented to be governed by the rule "accept the rule or be fined if you choose to drive. And by the way, you get to pay for the roads either way you choose." I say
401.
by wissler 14y ago
It is barbaric to think that if you think of something and create something based on it, then you can attack someone (whether directly or via the government is beside the point) and take their property if they think of and create it too. It
402.
by wissler 14y ago
There's nothing particularly complicated here. We are dealing more with mythology and barbaric thought processes than with an actually complicated problem.
403.
by wissler 14y ago
No, they are a restraint on original creation. If your original creation is conceptually similar to something else filed with a bureaucrat, you lose your original work. If you are a small company, and someone claims that it's similar, the
404.
by wissler 14y ago
Indeed. But one could have known as much by analyzing the moral case against patents: patents are unjust restraint of one human being from acting to think, create, and sell. There is no possible argument to say that you can bind another hum
405.
by wissler 14y ago
Please let this case turn into a hideous disaster, so that the patent system is revealed to the public at large as the hideous disaster it is. Many a small company's dreams have been quietly smothered by this patent system; the public only
406.
by wissler 14y ago
I suppose it's too much to hope that this patent war keeps on escalating until the destructiveness of patents is evident to everyone, for at some point these big companies will declare a truce and turn their attention to smaller victims, at
407.
by wissler 14y ago
If you think you see principles then we have a different standards of what constitutes a principle.
408.
by wissler 14y ago
"I would be surprised" is not a very good argument. What is clear is that there is no principle guiding the Supreme Court in these decisions; you have to know which way the political winds are blowing. That may "surprise" you, but it's stil
409.
by wissler 14y ago
I've always thought MVC was a joke played on gullible software engineers, kinda like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
410.
by wissler 14y ago
It's not hard to see at all: http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-liberty... See?
411.
by wissler 14y ago
There's something to think about comparing this story to the entrepreneur who sneaked into AOL: http://news.cnet.com/8301-32973_3-57440513-296/meet-the-tire...
412.
by wissler 14y ago
Please don't make me sign up in order to see how it works. Give me a link to a representative "simple markdown wiki."
413.
by wissler 14y ago
You don't mean it works for Linus Torvalds. You mean it works for you when Linus Torvalds does this. But you're just some guy on the Internet, so why should I care? Indeed, even if you were Linus Torvalds, why should I care, given the fact
414.
by wissler 14y ago
"I don't really see you citing any facts, just a lot of opinion." In your opinion. In my opinion, you're failing to address the argument I gave.
415.
by wissler 14y ago
My concept of "civil" might differ from yours. On my view, it's uncivilized to treat barbaric ideas and behavior as if they are civilized, because that only fosters barbarity. Many people are confused on this point. They think that you shou
416.
by wissler 14y ago
"Got a bit of the nastiness going there" Ever seen Idiocracy? Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's not. "If your users cannot figure out what you are trying to accomplish then yes, I believe you have failed" Your standards are idiotic. The
417.
by wissler 14y ago
So your premise is: if the masses do not understand, then it's not useful. The masses determine whether something "sucks" or not. I suppose the very fact that the word "sucks" being used to describe it goes along with your mentality.
418.
by wissler 14y ago
So for you, something "sucks" if it fails to win a popularity contest. I find that definition meaningless. Computers didn't "suck", they were and are magnificent, every step of the way.
419.
by wissler 14y ago
You may be too young to remember, but as computers were first becoming popular, may people had a hard time understanding them. And no, computers didn't "suck".
420.
by wissler 14y ago
The US government has successfully destroyed the world's largest storage medium that they couldn't just walk in and spy on without detection (US-based companies are subject to The Patriot Act and other "laws" that stand in defiance of The U

More ›