jdimov

I too would like to share my experience with both of you and see if there is still an opportunity to do something along these lines. Email me at mpesa@mlke.net

Not almost. I will hoard THE entire pie and I will not feel ONE bit of shame about it, because it is MY PIE! You are the one who should be ashamed for wanting to steal from my pie just because you are incapable of baking your own.

This is what you don't get, pal. The rest of the world may be able to get some of my cookies but they will NEVER have access to the COOKIE MACHINE because they are SHEEP. They just don't have it in them! Get it? You know what this means? It means I'll ALWAYS have my cookies and they will ALWAYS starve.

Just because the majority think they are entitled to the 1%'s wealth, does not make it so.

The French government might as well take 90% of that entrepreneur's wealth and "re-distribute" it to the so-called "People" (I call them "Sheep") and guess what? That one entrepreneur will still be wealthier than any of them and the "People" will still mumble. In other words, NOTHING will change.

Yes, let's do that! Here's a wake up call: I don't have access to any ingredients that everyone else doesn't also have access to!

Because it's not the ingredients. It's how I see them and what I do with them. You choose to cry all day long about scarcity and injustice. I choose to rejoice in the abundance and the unlimited opportunities given to me.

This is what makes me wealthy and you poor. Not the government. Not the political system. Not any form of justice or lack thereof. There is ULTIMATE justice in this world, ALWAYS. It is just as it should be.

And you will still die poor and miserable, because try as you might YOU CAN NOT TAKE this which I have and you don't. You will just never have it and I always will.

No, that's how disgruntled people WANT it to be. Luckily, it isn't and it never will be.

Re-distribution?? Ex-cuse-me?? These aren't YOUR cookies, you bum! Make your own cookies and THEN worry about re-distribution! When someone else has made the cookies, YOU DON'T GET A SAY in how they are distributed, do you get that?

I honestly don't understand why bitter, unaccomplished people believe that someone who creates wealth has an obligation to share that wealth with them. I believe that's commonly called "jealousy" and no, it doesn't give you a moral high ground, nor will it solve any of your problems and it will certainly not make you richer any time soon - quite the contrary, it ensures that you will remain miserable for the rest of your life.

Also, if you want the opinion of your "trusted contacts" - TALK to them. That's not what Twitter is for. If you posted your question publicly, people assume you would appreciate an answer.

This is pretty cool for what it is. Ignore the trolls, none of them have any valid points.

You might as well get off the Internet if that's your problem. Because it won't be getting any better for you.

That's because most healthy people are wrong. There are no risks or dangers worth fearing.

Forget the corruption, crazy laws, favouritism and racketeering. The biggest problem you'll face doing business in Italy is the wide-spread, deep-rooted "it can wait" mentality that is really prevalent. No one can be bothered with anything. Be prepared to wait for months and months for trivial tasks that can be completed in 30 minutes. Be prepared for people to cancel meetings at the last minute, then set a new date and time just to miss that one too - repeat ad nauseam. Don't even try to explain the concept of a "deadline" to an Italian.

The worst part is you can't even hate them for this, because they're so friendly and likeable!

Other than that, it's a lovely country. Make your wealth elsewhere and go enjoy what Italy has to offer.

I couldn't agree more! Socialism and equality are among THE most dis-empowering and evil ideas to come out of humanity. Unfortunately, these ideas have taken over reason so completely that they are now universally hailed as virtues.

Or just use Elixir.

Kowloon of the west :)

Here are my annotations for how I'm reading these. Feel free to correct or update:

1. Faster to use dict literals than the `dict()` constructor

2. Faster to sort a list in-place than to use `sorted()`

3. Faster to use multiple assignment than multiple individual assignments

4. Faster to evaluate multiple individual conditions than a single multi-comparison condition

5. Faster to use idiomatic implied truth value than to compare to `True`

6. Faster to use `!=` than `is not`

7. Fastest way to check for empty list `a` is the idiomatic `if not a`

8. Fastest way to check that an object is not null is `if a`

9. `enumerate` is faster than doing it yourself

10. Constructing strings with `+=` is faster than string surgery

11. Fastest way to place a number in a string is "%s" (not "%d")

12. For built-in types, using built-in functions (e.g. `len`) is faster than calling methods (e.g. `a.__len__`)

13. For built-in types, using built-in operators (e.g. `+`) is faster than calling methods (e.g. `a.__add__(b)`)

14. But for custom-defined classes, the opposite of #13 is true.

15. Adding up a bunch of numbers using `+` is faster than using `sum`

16. When initializing a large list, it is faster to use list comprehensions than to append each element individually

17. The fastest way to build a large dict is to use a dictionary comprehension

18. Same as #17

19. Not sure what the author is trying to demonstrate here. That `bool(a)` is faster when `a` is an empty list?

20. Faster to use implied truth value of an expression than to compare explicitly to `True` or `False`

21. The fastest way to refer to a list is to use the list literal (duh...)

22. It is faster to perform individual comparisons than to check for membership with `in`

23. Faster to `map` the `str` function to a list of values and join, than to manually build up the string. Also, when doing this, faster to use `xrange` than `range`

24. Faster to unpack than to access each list element individually. Also, as in #1, faster to use dict literal than the `dict()` constructor.

25. Faster to just return the boolean value of an expression than to check for it and then decide what to return.

26. Faster to give explicit values to keyword arguments than to expand a dict with kwargs.

27. To switch the values of `a` and `b`, it is faster to use a third variable than to do it in-place using unpacking.

28. Multiple assignment is faster than unpacking, which is faster than multiple individual assignments.

29. Fastest way to get integer part of a real is to use `math.floor`

30. Similar to #26 - it is faster to give explicit values to positional arguments than to expand a list of args.

31. Faster to access local vars than globals.

32. When trying to safely access a key in a dictionary, it is faster to use the idiomatic `D[k] if k in D` than to use the `get` method.

Both poor and rich are equally selfish in this respect. The reason for the observation is that "kindness" delivers diminishing returns once you've got other means to give yourself a kick.

What kind of communist propaganda is this? What world do you live in?

Thanks for the reply tip!

Sure, go cry to mommy.

Or grow up and may be have some ethics and security in place?

corin_ : Companies don't hire famous people to "do the job". They hire them because they are famous. E.g. Alicia Keys at Blackberry, Rihanna at Puma, Will.I.Am at Intel. So, university degree is indeed utterly irrelevant.

I just downloaded it from the UK. Works just fine for me.

What is scarier: that US gov has been lying about this or that US gov genuinely doesn't know what's going on within its agencies?

Looks like the US regime is not doing a good job of keeping mouths shut. Yankees haven't learned a thing from snooping on other dictators.

As any war on anything is bound to do. You can't push against something and get less of it - you get more pushing right back at ya.

In this sense, US Gov is the primary cause of and is directly responsible for nearly ALL terrorist acts in the past decades, globally.

And Obama has the nerve to call beheadings "barbaric"?

"One machine can do the work of 50 ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." Elbert Hubbard

When it comes to start-ups it's not stupid - it's wise. The food safety analogy is inappropriate. Security is about risk management. Low risks do not justify high expenses.

When it comes to a company with hundreds of millions in revenues, however, they have clearly underestimated the risks and have been irresponsible.