DjDarkman
Also like the author, I hate frameworks that do too much and won't let me be, my personal favorite is: Flourish http://flourishlib.com/ .It is a collection of classes, and that is what a framework should be instead of some monolithic system that generates code that you will have to maintain and has a zillion configuration files scattered all over the place.
Nothing prevents the government from doing the same. Also bitcoins are regulated by math, by principle I trust math more than I trust the government.
I think SC let's you learn how to play mind games, one of the ways to win a match is to understand what your opponents will think or do and play against that, surprise them, do something they would not expect.
There was a match where my allies were defeated I was alone and the 3 terran enemies got ready to drop the hammer on me with a bio army ( marines, marauders ), but I defeated all 3 of them with a handful of dark templars, because they were not prepared for that and I knew that because they were too self confident. Winning the game meant that I had to micro my units to their full extend, not letting them have a second to build detectors and jeopardize my plan so this really reinforces the notion that when you have an advantage you need to use that and get a bigger one.
A hard part of the game is that when you see that your tactic fails, you need to switch over to something else. When you have an air fleet and you realize that the enemy has marines, stalkers or any other anti air units, you need to build anti ground units instead and make use of your existing fleet, like attacking the enemy base while their army is busy fighting your second army.
The game also lets you take risks, you can go build cannons next to someone's base, you can quickly strike down a base with reapers, you could destroy a base with void rays or you could frustrate the enemy with mutalisks. These are all high risk, high reward moves, you could win the game in a few minutes, but you could also lose it if the enemy is well prepared for your tactic.
You could take a lot of real life situations and turn them into an SC game. The reason I play it is because it sharpens the mind, makes you think and act fast.
Just because a game contains objectionable material doesn't mean that the players will do that.
More thought:
Religion preaches that we should simply accept stuff as fact without proof. The Bible condemns knowledge, it says that we are all sinners by default because our ancestors have accessed the tree of knowledge.
No sane person accepts baseless assumptions without proof. If I would tell you that your great great great grand parent was raised by mice would you believe me?
Sorry but currently religion is the true venom.
> Dilbert creator and sexist jackass who last month opined that "women are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently,"
This article takes stuff out of context.
The big problem is that we still have: IE6, IE7, IE8 and probably IE9 too They are too slow, they will not allow you to write nice modularized code.
> Douglas can explain to me why he keeps writing about object users as "attackers" and "tamperers". Maybe it's a reflection of childhood trauma that manifests itself as a pathological distrust that he's struggling to overcome.
The OP does not understand what he is talking about, as far as I know Crockford's prototype overrides were done in a safe way, they were conditionally, in modern browsers you probably have them anyway.
Also if you develop web applications you always have to assume that people will want to hack you.
> Behave calmly and with restraint. They walk, eat and talk slowly.
I actually move fast phased and I may even look nervous, I feel that I need to keep the adrenaline flowing both for physical movement and mental actitivies.
You can call PHP anything you want but, the fact remains: it's easy to learn, and it gets the job done. It's not meant to be OOP like, if you want to go crazy with OOP, then go with a strongly typed language.
I don't want to sound like a racist(don't take this the wrong way), but I had a lot of projects where the client previously employed Indians to do it, who conveniently took the money and left a poor excuse of a product in it's place.
Most of the code Indians leave, is simply trash, no I don't mean bad code, I mean trash something that you will be forced to throw away.
Indians may be cheaper in the short term, but they won't be able to build your product.
These Indian freelancers give the rest of us a bad name(including the other Indian freelancers who are good coders).
In my opinion: anything you write about this topic will offend an army of people, so just don't do it, there are too many zealots out there who can't stand people who have different opinions.
JavaScript is not different from HTML and CSS, all of these are generated by a sometimes proprietary service and executed in the browser.
This article is completely stupid because it not only misses the point of JavaScript, it even contradicts itself:
- if the UI is plain HTML/CSS and is generated server side and then fed to your browser, you will never even have a clue how it works
- if the UI is done with JavaScript on the client you can always de-obfuscate it
> Further, we've recently seen companies such as Research In Motion (makers of the Blackberry) advising customers to entirely disable JavaScript in the WebKit browser on its devices because of a security problem that was discovered.
It seems the FSF wants to build a reputation by taking things out of context and leaving out important bits. The security was probably found in the browser and not in JavaScript, this is the same as advising someone to unplug the computer because of a computer virus.
I am really disappointed by this short sighted article, the FSF should be better than this.
If Facebook is a communication medium it must not hinder free speech.