|
So an online shop I buy from on regular basis (bol.com) has this amazing feature where they can recommend products based on your shopping behaviour.
Like this time when they recommend me a product I bought from them last week (Raging Bull DVD, yes, I buy DVD's)...
I get regular emails with recommendations, sometimes they're spot on, but lately I've gotten some recommendations from my wishlists.
I think they named their recommendation algorithm Obvious, that's written with a Big O!
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like they use google ads, they are about as useless.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, like when I bought my car, I immediately got flooded with ads for cars. Like I'm gonna buy another one just because there was an ad. Sheesh.
|
|
|
|
|
You don't? I recently bought a Lamborghini and then I saw an ad for a Ferrari so I went out and bought a Bugatti 
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
man i just wasted 3 hours typing my entry for android only to realize on submit of article , an error occured ,to top that off there isnt anything saved in draft .........why me lord why me code project articles always fail to publish
|
|
|
|
|
Your article will be saved and don't worry about that. Go to your profile where the articles are listed, there you can easily edit the article and resubmit 
|
|
|
|
|
Why not create your articles offline first, then copy and paste into the editor? That way you always have a local copy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That usually happens, just go one page back in the history and then resubmit it.
I hope, they fix this bug soon. I have to go through this many times while posting the articles. But I have found the temporary solution to be a history(-1) and then resubmit.
However, I have never seen anything like "article not saved as draft", make sure that the JavaScript is enabled on the browser.
Favourite line: Throw me to them wolves and close the gate up. I am afraid of what will happen to them wolves - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10826195 wrote: why me
Because:
" ... the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so." Jorge Luis Borges
« There is only one difference between a madman and me. The madman thinks he is sane. I know I am mad. » Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday on the radio I heard Phil Collins arguing with Prof Brian Cox about whether the moon landings were faked. I get the same thing all the time from my own relatives. Isn't it about time someone went back to the Moon and so shut these idiots up? Anyone - the Chinese, the Indians, Elon Musk, whatever. Just a repeat of the Apollo 8 mission (without actually landing) ought to be cheap, and would at least prove that you don't get fried if you pass through the Van Allen belts.
It's nearly the 50th anniversary after all.
|
|
|
|
|
All of the conspiracy theorists are idiots. Not one of them knows anything about radiation, shielding, photography, rocket engine blast in a vacuum, the capabilities of video capture back in the 60's/70's, or anything else!
It pretty easy to tell that, YES!, we were on the moon. Look at all the video of the lunar rover. Have you ever noticed that there is absolutely no dust hanging in the "air" behind it as they drive around? It all falls directly back to the surface of the moon because there's no air to offer resistance to it as gravity pulls it back down.
There isn't a single vacuum chamber on this planet that can hold a stage big enough to drive through like you see in the video!
|
|
|
|
|
What I particularly am amused by is how these conspiracy theorist idiots use 21st century CG to "prove" how easy it would be to fake the moon missions, not realizing that Hollywood in the 60's Star Trek was pretty much state of the art visual effects. You can actually see the wires hold up Nomad has he hovers around the corridors of the Enterprise!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
One may think that they at least could afford some more costly effects than on Star Trek when they were willing to let a huge rocket fly off to nownere before everyone's eyes.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
|
|
|
|
|
It's amazing how many facts people will ignore when it contradicts their world view and how much they hang-on to garbage when it agrees with it.
When I was a teenager there was a whole "death of Paul McCartney" conspiracy theory. The small observations, over-simplifications and exaggerations that went in to this were a lot of fun. I'm still not certain that John Lennon wasn't indulging in a bit of mischief in feeding this. The first person to post "you mean it wasn't real" will get a virtual smack on the back of the head!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
Besides proving we can still do it and employing a whole industry, going to the moon (again) seems like a complete waste of taxpayer money.
Keith Barrett wrote: Phil Collins arguing with Prof Brian Cox about whether the moon landings were faked.
On the other hand, I would be happy to have my tax dollars go towards education so that idiots like this, well, wouldn't be such idiots.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I'm hoping it can be done without spending any taxpayer money. If billionaires can afford a holiday on the ISS, maybe they could fund a jaunt to the Moon.
|
|
|
|
|
Or maybe it could be funded through Kickstarter.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Besides proving we can still do it and employing a whole industry, going to the moon (again) seems like a complete waste of taxpayer money
I disagree. I believe that "going to the moon again", with the objective of establishing a permanent human presence both in Earth orbit and on the lunar surface, represents three things.
One, it would create a technological Renaissance like the Apollo program did. The dividends paid by the space program from the late 50's through the early 70's are almost incalculable. The inertia from that period is gone, however. It's been replaced by baroque excess (cell phones, for example).
Two, we have multiple planet-wide crises that are presently sub-critical. Population growth, widespread warfare over ideologies and resources, and ever-increasing ineptitude by the predominant nations all threaten humanity's survival. While another 'Apollo' program wouldn't help those concerns directly, mammoth R&D efforts like that always produce unforeseen secondary benefits. Those benefits might alleviate or help manage some of these issues, at least in the short term.
The most important aspect of such a program is it would in a generation or two create a human population with a unique perspective. Their loyalties would not necessarily be innately tied to a single nation-state, religion, or other such entity. Living in orbit, looking at Earth, they would see it as Armstrong and his 20 brethren have: our home. I think that perspective is a necessary prerequisite for humanity's survival on this planet.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Keith Barrett wrote: without actually landing
On the contrary, I believe that a landing is necessary. Give the idiots one way tickets and land them on the moon themselves proving once and for all that it actually happened.
You can lead a developer to CodeProject, but you can't make them think.
The Theory of Gravity was invented for the sole purpose of distracting you from investigating the scientific fact that the Earth sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
Wes Aday wrote: and land them on the moon themselves
(half of them without suits, so the other half has something to talk about when they get back... Or maybe all of them without suits.)
disclaimer: If you are a conspiracy nut, of course I don't mean you! I would never advocate killing people! But you could strap yourself to the outside of the capsule during takeoff, just to catch the full experience (again, no suit - who would want to sully such an exciting adventure with protective gear?).
|
|
|
|
|
David O'Neil wrote: all of them without suits
Why waste the money on suits?
You can lead a developer to CodeProject, but you can't make them think.
The Theory of Gravity was invented for the sole purpose of distracting you from investigating the scientific fact that the Earth sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
We could send them there, the ultimate proof that it can be done.
And a 1 way trip would be cheaper 
|
|
|
|
|
Man it's hard to believe it's been almost 50 years. Wow where did the time go?
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
