|
grralph1 wrote: I had forgotten all about EDLIN
I've tried.
Gawd knows, I've tried!
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
NAAAAH, In the beginning was, it was Copy CON: housed within humble Command.COM
Seems like no one remembers the original method of creating a batch file in early DOS Versions
(as was shown in Microsoft manuals). This was before geeks @ Microsoft wisened up to copy UNIX redirection idea.
C:> Copy Con: somefile.bat
echo first line of batch
echo %1
^Z
1 file(s) copied.
C:>
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch  those were the days. 
The first batch file I wrote was done precisely like this. The first programming I did on the PC was via the command-line 'debug.com' - that thing made batch-file editing like the above almost seem luxurious.
"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin
|
|
|
|
|
Yes... I had jumped up and down with joy when someone showed me tool called EDLIN that would allow me to fix mistakes on the line itself.
Regarding your footnote:
enhzflep wrote: Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin
Does not Science require that you have Faith in the Scientist and his claims that he knows the subject?
|
|
|
|
|
:grin: Wow! you mean I can backspace and change what I've already written? Maybe these computers are better than pen and paper after all...
About your question on my sig - No, I don't believe that to be the case. The thing with science is that an idea is put forward. If that idea can be attacked relentlessly from all sides without being shown erroneous, that idea is then adopted as the current explanation for a phenomenon.
Einstein made assertions about general relativity. These were held in the highest regard until recent times, when they were shown to be incorrect. Close, but incorrect.
Science is a discipline that is peer-reviewed. That is to say, others must be able to examine your conclusions for there to be any hope of them being adopted and to carry any weight. Science gives each of us the opportunity to examine the findings of others for ourselves. Whether or not our understanding and access to materials/facilities related to any particular field are enough to equip us with the means to examine findings is another matter. But the ability to verify an assertion for oneself is one of the pillars of the scientific method.
Evidence of the Ark, that Mary never shagged Joseph first, the parting of the red sea, the existence of an afterlife. All of these are unprovable assertions that have clear and obvious benefit to those making them.
Sheikh Saleh bin Saad al-Lohaidan said If a woman drives a car, not out of pure necessity, that could have negative physiological impacts as functional and physiological medical studies show that it automatically affects the ovaries and pushes the pelvis upwards," he told Sabq.
"That is why we find those who regularly drive have children with clinical problems of varying degrees,"
No studies or proof cited. We're expected to take his word on it, based upon his standing in society. In fact, with equally little evidence, one could just as (un)reasonably argue that the reverse was true. Using only anecdotal evidence, it certainly seems more plausible than the position he holds..
"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: if only the multiverse had been thoroughly debugged before it was released
Yeah, a world without bugs would spare us some nuisance 
(Note: I know bugs are essential for the ecosystem, just imagine that they wouldn't be needed  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
There goes my productivity. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
One thing this definitely proves is that Microsoft is not as fun as Google.
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] is quite neat. And it is available for Win 95 -> Win8!
Keep Clam And Proofread
--
√(-1) 23 ∑ π...
And it was delicious.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't use Calibre often - I prefer to read books on my tablet these days - but I needed to use it today, and it popped up the "There is a new version!" dialog. Nope, just leave me alone...
Then when I was done I thought to myself, "so which version was it again?" - hepfully it shows me on it's status bar: V1.5 is available. And what version am I? V0.9 - hmm, that's only six versions...but V0 always sound like beta to me. Maybe I should upgrade? Let's see the changelog...ah. Not V0.9 then, V0.9.12 And there was 0.9.12 to 0.9.44 inclusive? Before it switched to 1.0?
Maybe I should do auto updates... 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
I tried using Calibre to convert a couple of PDF's to eBook but I didn' read the instructions on how to do it and they turned out terrible so I downloaded Foxit for my tablet and it works great.
|
|
|
|
|
Think about all the bug patches you avoided by not updating.
Whenever the software allows, I wait for at least a week before allowing it to update itself.
Whenever it does not allow, I hunt down and delete its freaking autoupdate executable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
How could you miss these. The barrel roll one was certainly all over the lounge for a couple of days last year (or whenever it was, Leslie might still have been kicking at the time).
There is a wiki page that lists all Googles easter eggs, and another with MS ones.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm clearly not very observant, or developing memory problems... 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
Safer to say "I must have been away that week" who will know! 
|
|
|
|
|
Me?
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
wow!! ^^
I have something to show at work Monday, thanks! ^^
|
|
|
|
|
Nice! 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Cool. Haven't seen this before as well.
I only one I saw was when you Google for recursion.
Signature construction in progress. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Damn you have the perfect signature - CBadger
|
|
|
|
|
|
May people say (to summarize) "capitalism has proved itself to be the only viable economic system"
Let say I kind of agree with that statement.
Then they go on saying we should abolish tax, promote small government, blah blah, .. here I loose the plot..
This "pro capitalist" people seems to think that capitalism is anarchy. Yet anarchy has never happened and it has never been validated by past success (guess what? tax in the US were higher in the 50s).
In a word I think there is a very big fallacy running around people where people attribute past success of A (what I think is capitalism) to B (which is Anarchy, and has obviously no links with past success except for the renaming) and go on promote B (Anarchy) because it is supposedly successful like A (free enterprise, rule of law)
this article made everything clear! 
http://progressiveliving.org/economics/capitalism_socialism_communism.htm[^]
Further this one elaborate nicely on common confusions..
http://www.nolanchart.com/article4246-socialism-and-capitalism.html[^]
Anyhow while I wanted to rename my political affiliation as "socialist capitalist" I think I would have to change (to avoid confusion) into "free entrepreneur rules of law socialist" less ambiguous!
Speaking of which is there a name for the political system favouring the rule of law (as opposed to the will of despot) and private property and free enterprise (as government ownership)???
modified 28-Sep-13 22:52pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalism promotes innovation moreso than any other system, I don't think we would live in the world we live in today without it. It's a strong driving force.
|
|
|
|
|
I am confused because... there are many conflicting thing that people call capitalism, they can't all be!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
