296 karma · joined September 7, 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_AHJQiMxIw
Photo of women in 1979, before Islamic Revolution:
It wouldn't show that it was not bound for the same fate, but at least it would show you have the minimum level of self-respect, pride as a nation, and awareness needed to fix the issue in the future. Money, charm, and favoritism shouldn't drive and win a political campaign. Idealists should be able to get attention and be elected, instead of being hidden and smeared: establish a number of TV slots at random, say 10 or 20, pick candidates at random (if there are more than the available slots), and let them have the same air time. Also, corporations shouldn't be allowed to make donations to finance political campaigns. That's bribe in our faces. Teach the basics of economics in schools, so they understand where inflation comes from, and how it's not a natural disaster.
Seeing Obama reelected was the final proof I needed. Whether the alternative was worse or better does not even matter, the system is doomed. People will vote whatever they see on TV, and will fall for the same old politician tricks. Get the poor and the naive, win the elections, and then steal from everyone through things like inflation and bailouts.
I'll just drop here this perverse quote from Obama, after he saw that the current president of Argentina (who absolutely destroyed what was left of the country) got 54% of votes and got reelected on 2011. He said something like "I have things to learn from you". Sure, it could be nothing, don't listen to me.
Do software like XAMP have bad defaults and shouldn't be used for production out of the box? Maybe.
Has that helped a lot of people to get started, and make PHP the most popular server language for the web? Definitely.
Should we mock all php devs including experts, because of designers or ninja CEOs who tried/succeeded in editiing or making a website but made some mistakes in the process? The answer is still no.
I must have corrected the 'ad hominem' thing at least 5 times today, so I'm tired. It's not ad hominem if it's not trying to undermine an argument (it's just insulting or trolling), and it's not ad hominem either if it's relevant (eg: programmer does not know the basics, that fact comes to light, and is used against him in a programming discussion).
Also, it wasn't an ad hominem, since there wasn't any argument being debated. Get your fallacies straight.
I guess this is why you have 9999 submissions with 1 point. To be able to go around downvoting and incorrectly calling people out on a fallacy (the new trick you have learned).
And for the sweet downvotes, I'll just drop this here:
Tell me more about how you read the GoF book, and applied the patterns in a language that does not even have interfaces or type-hinting. What a joke. On a recent article, another "Ruby expert" (who writes and sells programming books) was shocked by the fact that you can reuse code with inheritance. You should read it.
Either way, I don't see how any of this matters. I explained why I criticized the guy, and instead of working on that, you tried to undermine the anecdotal part.
All of this blew me away."
You mean a lot of persons? If you don't, I wonder where you got this from. Personal experience maybe?
Anecdotic: I have always been good at sports, popular, and confident, and I criticized this article because he used a kind of link-bait title (should have been "Today I learned about inheritance and it's awesome", something like that), and he also turned out to be selling programming books like he was an expert, which is scammy, and reinforces the fact that you can only find good books through recommendations from your peers.
The problem is not that he's learning, he's teaching.
Then everyone is surprised when critical bugs come to light in Ruby stuff.
I'm curious, where in Australia do you live if I may ask?
> the idea of Americans/Zionists/Illuminati/Nibiru pulling the strings behind every major event is no doubt very exciting for conspiracy theorists
Someone is a "conspiracy theorist", so whatever he finds exciting must be wrong.