Maybe because when they do something wrong, they believe an imaginary being will forgive and still love them; or if they encounter difficulty, they can beg this imaginary being to help and think they're doing something meaningful.
The main drawback is that all of them (at least the main ones - Scala, JRuby, Groovy, Clojure) all have their own runtime libraries, which bloats the size of the app considerably. I believe most people who go down this route use ProGuard to mitigate this problem.
Yes, but with certain downsides. The app is going to be larger than it would otherwise be. The development process is going to be far more difficult that it would otherwise be (configuring things, getting it to work, dealing with new versions of your tools). If you're writing a real-time game, it's probably not going to fly to do this, because in a game you need complete control over all memory allocation to avoid or control garbage collection. Something like Scala spins off a whole bunch of little objects non-stop in ways you can't control, in addition to using far more memory than a normal Java app.
It looks like an interesting article, so it is a shame that it was split into 5 pages with no way to view everything on one page. I have no recourse but to not read the article at all.
> I have no recourse but to not read the article at all
You could click the next button 4 times and read the full article. There's lots of content on each page. It would've taken 100% less typing than this complaint, and you would've spent that time learning instead of grumbling.
It's a real shame you can't read books either. Whole libraries of documents split into pages with no "view all" button.
There's a big difference in turning a page the size of your hand when you are already holding the book and trying to click a micro button the size of a word when you use the arrow keys to move the browser window.
I'll just wait until the exact same information appears on a single page. I was expressing sincere regret because I liked the first page, but I absolutely will not read paginated articles.
Also: you're obviously irritated by my grumbling, but grumbling about it is just a massive load of hypocrisy, so please realize I'm not going to be taking any of your comments all that seriously.
~ $ curl -s 'http://www.realworldtech.com/arm64/'{1..5}'/' --compressed > a.html; open a.html
("open" is OS X-specific; "nautilus-open" might have a similar function on Linux or something.) Interestingly, that website seems to deliver gzip-compressed output no matter what you request.
Relevant terms are "brace expansion" and "range". And, um, at least for me, the command I wrote works verbatim in zsh. (I think zsh is supposed to be bash-compatible like that.) Brace expansion works like this (in zsh and bash):
In Chrome: typing Ctrl+F <space>2<space> <Esc> <Enter> will get you to the next page, no need to use the mouse if you're concerned about moving your hands.
It scrapes down and combines multi-page articles like this with a click for on or offline reading. Great interface and mobile apps too, I use it all the time.
> Nobody is responsible for other people's children.
He didn't say anybody (other than United) was responsible.
> Not making sure an unaccompanied minor gets to her next flight is not "lack of human decency".
I'd say not helping a fellow human in distress, especially a vulnerable one (such as a child) in a situation where you can help at next to no cost, definitely qualifies for "lack of human decency".
Incorrect. He imposed responsibility on the passengers next to her.
> "I want to know who the the passengers were sitting next to this child were that didn't help her with her transfer."
And, no, you don't know she was in obvious distress, nor do you know the passengers next to her were aware of her problem as they were disembarking.
Not taking the time to help a child to the next gate is normal, any rational actor would expect the airline to take care of it; the fact that they did not does not mean the other passengers lack human decency, what the hell.
I don't think you are morally correct just because you haven't gotten any complaints.
In fact, until you make it possible for people to permanently delete things, you are not. The reason you haven't gotten any complaints is that the people who deleted things on purpose don't send you an email and don't know it can be undone.
Then why are you not using POP or IMAP with a separate password? What are they going to do with the auth code when they don't have your original password?
I'm not trying to defend their stupid choice of offering option #2, but rather trying to offer a solution to your current problem.
If my phone becomes unavailable (eg lost/ stolen/ dropped in a toilet) then I need a backup option to login. The backup options Google provides are:
* Use a backup code
* Use a backup phone number
* None of the above, I still need help!
1. The backup codes are suggested to be printed and stored in a wallet; however you can put them anywhere you like.
2. The backup phone number can be somebody else's number. Your best friend, your partner, whatever.
3. If you still can't get a backup code, the third option is to go through Google's support team and recovery process. Selecting this option results in an advisory message stating the process could take from 3 to 5 days.
I guess that's fair, but since it seems like that's how it got gamed, they should definitely be more strict and send only to your primary or backup number.
You should be using POP or IMAP only on your phone so that you can revoke permission after it is stolen (when you log in to your account from a desktop and use a backup key from the printout). If you are logged in to your main Google account on your phone you are asking for trouble. While I will be sympathetic after it gets stolen and someone ruins your life, I won't be surprised.
In the US, at least, the legality of jailbreaking currently rests on a temporary DMCA exception that needs to be renewed every three years. Prospects for the renewal look good at the moment:
