thenerdfiles

Because they're Old Guards.

"to mine" =def (trans.) the act of declaring exclusive ownership rights of an object for the speaker of the sentence.

They did the same to our account, and informed us that they had sent an account shutdown warning notice to an address with no zip code.

Then they reminded us that they do not have have to provide a reason, a month after they sent the letter, and of course after we called them.

The Internet is apparently in its "infantile" brain stage. Would we notice when the Internet's "memory" (the Web) becomes a cantankerously irreverent mentally unstable adolescent?

And we're imprisoned in this madness!

Isn't the W3C the UN of Web Standards?

Why would you not expect programmers with strong political leanings? What kind of world do you live in where top researchers all share moderate views and modes of expressing those views?

(Like tracking CSS pseudo-classes or CSSi.)

    It makes it possible to work on stuff you don't particularly enjoy by focussing on an expected long-term reward.

That part of the brain plays a role in the process of expectation — it does not, by itself, make it possible. Language, other brain functions, social inertia, etc. makes expectation possible, and there is a critical question of the content of expectation.

Cannabis obviously increases appetite and drives a greater motivation for munchies. Therefore, the reduction of dopeminergic brain-activity alone does not isolate cannabis as the defeater of all motivation but rather of certain kinds of motivation dependent on pleasure-data. Obviously what if I derive pleasure from making logical deductions or from reading? What of children who are synesthes, and who mix up stimulae as a neurotypicality modality that is atypical?

"We find that the academic performance of students who are no longer legally permitted to buy cannabis increases substantially."

Pfft.

For my own case, when I smoke cannabis, my brain becomes hyperactive. I want to resolve all of my codesmell at once. I want to finish all of my code at once. My writing becomes "electric". My writing becomes transcendental and on fire — why do I become electric, yet all of these students become unmotivated globs? Tell me why this is the case before you moralize and vilify such a beautiful plant!

So maybe it's me. Or maybe the lot of you just don't know how to smoke and ritualize the practice. Maybe you all have a flawed philosophy to begin with, or worse, you don't have a philosophy about what you're smoking — to begin with.

As Kafka notes:

The unfitness of the object may cause one to overlook the unfitness of the means. — Franz Kafka

No. It's for the fact that in order to climb the corporate ladder, one must sacrifice "empathy-potential" because one becomes conditioned to hypercompetitive behavior. Think of this as "learned winning"; it's cheaper to win because one is in "win-mode" than to actually always win through exhaustion of relevant skill (so, too, winning by "luck" or succeeding through luck, is better than succeeding through hard work — so being conditioned to a hypercompetitive attitude is like being on "luck mode" because others who are not in that attitudinal predisposition will essentially fail to maximize their relevant skills whereas someone in "win-mode" will already be in a conditioned skill-optimal (total maximalization) state.). The asymmetry here is that if you stress yourself out well before your menopausal stage, now you've risked it all only to sacrifice yourself — and you lose out on having a healthy body to support childbirth physiologically and psychologically.

Men do not have the opportunity to give birth, so they can weigh in more heavily on self-sacrifice without the contingency that their body could be used as a medium for life-production.

Basically, men are more like prototypal inheritance whereas women are more like classical inheritance, or at least we like to think that men are more "existential" while women are conservative in their "recreate the self".

Most men advance in careers that are inherently lethal; so naturally women are going to be less driven to advance themselves in careers that compromise their total contract not only as financial agents but as well as genetic agents.

    It absolutely makes no difference what race the poor people are.

When did it become cool to assume that the logical possibility of discrimination is on the same order of effects to our free markets as actual discrimination? How did you people get past high school?

I'm often hired exactly because I do not "fit" within the culture, but because I am apparently African American, it becomes important to trial a litmus test.

I think "culture fit" is generally opportunity for both sides to determine if their brands of humor are compatible.

If you cannot laugh with your coworkers, why work there?

A large part of the "human-centric" modality of web design, for instance, involves writing less code and solving human needs. If you do not have hobbies, etc., why participate in what is inherently a social activity? You are writing code for humans, and humans are likely those wherein you will craft and discover solutions.

Dependency Injection and Modularity are not the same thing. Modularity implies swappability, whereas Angular typically involves a "controllers space" or silo'd services.

AngularAMD is interesting. It's really nice to load jQuery on a per-route basis, where I can isolate module dependencies and generally think of plugins to my applications from an external perspective. RequireJS facilitates an ecosystem where plugins AND modules exist side by side. AngularJS doesn't account for plugins (and "pages" are interesting combinations of modules and plugins which also can sit on the same level), which sit on the same level as modules.

Theorems are muscles of the mind.

https://gist.github.com/nerdfiles/80b1126f11b66110d213

I have a bunch of feeds that hit my inbox from Yahoo! Pipes that mashes up NPR and I think Aljazeera.

Then I follow a bunch of futurists on scoop.it for transhumanist news, future science, etc.

This site could implement an ACL though github accounts and provide centralized, recipe-like plugin and *rc file mashups like alias.sh with an ifttt.com twist.

Bootstrap isn't a prototyping framework — it's made for production. This fact subsumes the points about (1) testing across browsers, (2) being community-driven (and thus scientific), (3) aesthetic standards, and (4) implementation standards.

Sure you can make your own hammer, and you can even use a non-hammer you find sitting right next to you. But you'll quickly find out that some non-hammer won't accomplish everything you think a hammer ought to accomplish. Bootstrap isn't just an invention/innovation — it is a framework.

Your question honestly is no different from "Why do we need frameworks?" And we just need to stop wasting out time asking these bloated philosophical questions that get us nowhere.

"Why do we need dictionaries?" Well, because if everyone went about their own way, they'd all re-invent the wheel a thousand times over, but we'd never see any cars.

npm_lazy to the rescue!

Not a bot, even if it is a bot.

What kind of metaphysics is in "hypermedia"? What is after the hypermedia? "Meta-hypermedia"?

How does one specialize in that?

I'm trying this out in AngularJS. So there's an issue with classes locked away inside templates (or building with @ng-class, anyone?), and authentication scenarios.

I'm thinking about building URL workflows (stored in arrays) and passing authentication tokens via URL.

I've recently personally dealt with this. The consequences of the experiment have been immense, but I'll spare the details.

These hacker schools are looking for knowledge workers. The higher ranks will be more associated with the centers of codebases/workflows/builds/systems. Some of us manage way more information than even the common person is willing to talk about. Nerds can withstand complexity, and [that] is what people know.

The culture becomes, regardless of intelligence, [that person who manages such-and-such complex thing]. If the person is smart, it helps.

I'm just surprised we're not talking about changing the PSS (Popularity Style Sheets) on A-E.

Or are we? I noticed this immediately, before even reading the pg article (OP), I saw this post and knew that it was instigating a counterpoint, only to re-brand the point in a different set of words.

I think an example is in order because this really hits a spot on this cultural analysis debate that I think everyone is missing. We often lean on the side of innateness which the theory that we want to prove has a domain whose scope is really big — "innateness" is the formulation of words necessary to describe the phenomenon within the speech genre underway. The point behind Chomsky sentences is that truth plays a role in language, all language, even scientific language, which is not always necessarily and sufficiently conditioned by the morphological construction presently being given attention, or what can we call an object of intention. So, the point here is that lots of theories exist, but regardless of their linguistic narrative, they tend to fail at larger orders of abstraction.

There are two absolutely perfect examples.

1. Most families don't celebrate Mother's Day.

2. Cross-country runners are breed, not born.

1 not only is a combination of both, but we behave very often as if it were false. We have such a trait in virtue of an innate quality, namely of having a mother. Yet we all learned not by any conscious effort to warn ourselves from the principle; it's part and parcel of our "innate" characteristic.

With 2, I often hear this expressed in terms of geological factors. Does the environment at any given time contribute to the innate material our theory describes?

"Beauty is only skin deep" — "Looks only go so far" — and the plethora of other cultural restrictions on "beauty".

As is always pertinent to this discussion:

    Do we worship the Gods because they are beautiful, or are the Gods beautiful because we worship them?

It's when Angular has to play with something else, some other library or plugin. And the more Angular Modules you outsource, the hope is that you're all using Directives and Promises rigorously. It gives templates a lot more say in terms of complexity.

Some days my vim looks like (mostly Directives):

    ----------------------------
    |    |    |    |     |     |
    |    |    |    |-----------|
    |    |    |    |     |     |
    |    |    |    |-----------|
    |    |    |    |     |     |
    ----------------------------
    

Debugging. Hacking is stepping into a program's skin. It's spinning your laptop around to turn into an effect what someone just blurted out in conversation about what the app should do. Hacking is looking at 3D view in FF and saying "cool." Not "why?" Hacking is rewriting the same if statement knowing full well the profiler will tell you the story. Hacking is forever hoping the damn computer will do what you want, or feel, rather than what you tell it. Hacking is forever refactoring like a kid smacking piano keys until 4am because you know that daylight shit is just tedium and yet another lunch with essentially the same ingredients. It is living to the fullest extent of one's own stupidity, and thriving on the next crushing blow to your ego.

Hacking is ego death.

Keybindings are the same, motions the same — but you should expect more motions (vim-easymotion), a lot of other great plugins, and a very enhanced <leader>-space.

vim-spf13 is the way to go.

I cannot believe how beautifully easy it is to hit the ground running. Incomparable.

Except for maybe LightTable, but I'm constantly running into PATH issues. So I will settle (is it really "settling"?) for PythonMode in vim.

...or your uncle.

    To present a theory is to specify a family of structures, its
    models; and secondly, to specify certain parts of those 
    models (the empirical substructures) as candidates for the
    direct representation of observable phenomena.
    — van Fraassen. The Scientific Image. Page 64. 1980.

    It is not only agreement in definitions but also (odd as it
    may sound) in judgments that is required.
    — Wittgenstein's PI, somewhere deep in there around 200.

From the perspective of a Hilbertian mathematical ideal, all conjectures are a kind of "paradise" for which we must apply method and tools. Strictly speaking, linguistic items serve as the material edifice in which we make experiment and theorizing about "propositions" and "mathematical objectivities" insofar as their existences are palpabable (by Occam's Razor, and various other First Principles) which would appear repugnant to reason to flout, ignore, or misplace.

Molecular markup?

Microschemas?

Turtles all the way down?

RDF1.1 received Recommendation status last week!