Where in my comment did I describe Worlds in a limited way? I just gave one small example of one possible application of them, in reply to a comment specifically about their relationship to transactions.
1,931 karma · joined November 18, 2007
Where in my comment did I describe Worlds in a limited way? I just gave one small example of one possible application of them, in reply to a comment specifically about their relationship to transactions.
try:
remote_resource.start_transaction()
#dostuff
remote_resource.commit()
except e:
remote_resource.rollback()
How do you do the same thing when modifying a local variable? You might try making a copy, modifying that, and then assigning back, but that's boilerplate, and it's easy to get wrong. Worlds are a more primitive mechanism that would be baked into a language, such that building a generic transaction api for local actions on top of worlds would be trivial. The fact that it could look exactly like the transaction api that you currently know and love for remote resources is a feature.The period is a part of the quotation itself.
3. Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause.
I was with him until he said, "I could care less."
Couldn't, dammit, COULD NOT. This irks me to no end.
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/01/
The fact that CL is already doing the thing that Godin just descended from the sky to tell us CL should do is, to you, evidence that this isn't 'unbelievably weak'? Will you start reading my blog if I promise to fill it with gems like "What if Google started matching ads with searches?" or "What if Amazon started up an affiliate program?"
For the record, I think Spolsky can be pretty unbelievably lame, as well. People have been talking about how CL should monetize for years.
This is unbelievably weak. Godin's not exactly on a hot streak right now, is he?
To be clear, I have nothing but mad respect for Stallman, even though my personal beliefs differ from his. He can be extreme sometimes, but his firm adherence to his beliefs is important. Calling him a traitor is completely out of line.
Anyways, I don't see anything about this that's as horribly unethical as the picture the article is trying to paint. It's certainly not as bad as the Get Satisfaction fiasco, where GS was doing everything short of directly claiming to be an official support channel for companies that had no affiliation. This is just a lame aggregation with a lamer business model. I'm more disappointed in Seth for a lack of creativity, style, and value.
No, they have a history of promising breakthrough innovation and then woefully underdelivering.
Yeah, ask Zimbabwe how that's working out.
you can chose to do interesting stuff that will make you money while you work for the man.
I don't think that's the point they're making at all. They're saying don't work for the man, and don't look for an opportunity to sell your work to the man for a giant payday - "do your own thing" and keep doing it.
That makes no sense. Of course you need to get that opportunity from someone else: your customers, your family, your investors, or your buyer, whoever is handing you the money you need to meet your needs. At the end of the day, if someone else hasn't given it to you, you aren't getting it.
I don't think this is arrogance, it's just a social norm that I personally think is pretty well established at this point. An actual phone call has a level of formality/familiarity to it at this point, and I think it's just rude to presume you can unilaterally breach that. Everyone's time is valuable, and it's kind of a dick move to try to take that time from someone (regardless of who they are) just because you want to give your pitch to a stranger.
To Dave Winer?
This is ridiculous.