laythea

oh no. not on here also.....

Using the term "facebook life" demonstrates a certain mentality

Isn't this part of the problem. I mean "facebook life" is an expression I do not use.

I highly recommend others don't also.

This is how compilers and IDE's were, back in the day. Things changed and now community editions are rife.

Maybe this will happen someday with Maths software.

Still - If someone had a life threatening issue, I'm not sure they would think that the extra money spent on this kind of thing (icons etc) is more important.

I can only assume that because the site has an nhs.uk address that this is sponsored by them, appreciate any clarification.

Sorry for sounding like this but I'm not very happy that the NHS is spending money on these first world problems, when there are people who cannot get seen with life threatening illness.

this man speaks a good point

Is this as real as the computer edited NASA images (eg of earth) or is the actually real?

The tools for Java are greate (try C++ if you disagree).

It's the code that is the problem here.

I still have to select the sub-expression whose value I wish to inspect. This involves precisely aiming the cursor at text, which is a lot of mental burden (x millions).

A task I thank the developer who creates a variable to hold such a reference, for it creates a much better experience.

I know she is trying to make a point, but I don't think she should have mispelt almost every word.

Cannot agree with you more. I personally hate chained expressions. Awful for debugging too.

Yes but, the lack of feelings can be classed as a feeling also. Where does that leave us! :)

That does beg the interesting question that if you don't feel depressed, are you really depressed?

First of all phones were big, then they got small, then big. And now small again. People are so fickle.

In my opinion, this doesn't really offer any value as the only way to get a good understanding of the news is to read from lots of different places and come to a view. Using this strategy then consuming a truly "random" site is better than consuming pre reviewed site as there is no bias in selection or outcome.

It's not like films, where each one is independent (except marvel and dc comics obviously :)

You are depressingly correct.

I think Garvey has it right. My use of 'fake' does not mean nutritionally vacant. It means "an animal did not die to provide it".

It is also the same reason I believe it is wrong to waste meat.

I am not sure why my opinion is being shot down.

If I was cheering for fake meat, I wonder whether this would be the case. Is this a "touchy" subject? If my opinion offends, please be less sensitive.

To say fake meat is identical to real meat is to say that humans understand everything about the process. We don't, but like to pretend we do.

I admit, I also have this view because of an association with meat and live animals - hence, meat comes from life. It is special.

If it is grown in a lab, it looses this. Although some will say fake meat still comes from life, I disagree.

I think my opinion is historically aligned with mainstream.

I would not eat any meat that has been grown by a human. Logic tells me fake meat is not the same as real meat. It must lack something real meat has. Otherwise, it would be real.

SaaS for diagrams? No thanks! It's probably very good software, but I can't tolerate the business model, sorry.

"Are developers trying to improve the product, or are you just collecting data to sell to 3rd parties?"

Problem is, there is no way to know or properly police this.

When any normal person visits a store they can see the security cameras watching, and they can likely image that they may be counted.

It is not accurate to say that it is like that the average person who goes to a web site is even in the slightest aware of all the different ways in which they are being used.

Where is the distinction between spying on a user using a piece of traditional software and a web site. At the end of the day, you are spying on users to better yourself and sometimes at the cost of the user, who mostly is not aware of the manipulation that goes on. Sorry for the cynicism, but that is the reality.

I hate all these user spying tools, whether home grown or bought in. Please, if you write software, don't do it.

Just let us buy the software and run it. Like in the good old days.

Maybe the F.A.A is a bit too cosy with Boeing?

This is no surprise to me and I wager that far worse is happening with your data.

Off course, it is not the case that a 3yr+ gap means no bonding, but I think each year gap makes a massive difference when they are young.

If this is what is meant by 3 year rule, then in my opinion, this is utter nonsense. Having the 3 youngins play and bond together at a similar age is why we deliberately had them as close as possible. Its great to see the bonds develop.

What's this 3 year rule that I have also missed then?