|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: Some of us have no brain to stimulate.
Too true. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fantastic script, but the delivery's maybe a tad too Ben Elton.
It's worth watching more, so I know what my workload is for the day.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Ted Cruz is a cheap demagogue who wants only to squeeze the fear glands of his idiotic donors.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and unfortunately I live in the state that voted for him and just reelected Cornyn. Though there are so many great things about Texas, I used to think it outweighed a lot of the politics.
|
|
|
|
|
Net neutrality?
I want net! Gimme it! Your infrastructure is a public utility! You didn't build that! You can't do what you want with it! But I can, because I DON'T own it! I'm entitled! Muuummmeeee! But I WANT it! 
|
|
|
|
|
It always amazes me regarding the elitist attitudes shown by really smart technical people.... who then proceed to piss all over someone who has an opinion different than their own. You have to put things in context people.
We've just have 6 years of lies and deceit. I'm not going to get into the politics of the last 6 years, but a goodly number of Americans don't trust their government. For Obama to suddenly get involved does one of two things: (1) alarm bells or (2) oh $hit! There's always a reason for what he does. Always. There have already been calls from one side of the FCC to regulate all these "non news news sites."
Over the past 50 years or so, Congress has ceded more and more of it's authority to the executive branch - both parties have done this. Now, we have an Executive branch that rules by regulation. I cite one potential example below. So, color me distrustful.
Now, if there were a bunch of Andy's and the like, who were TECHNICALLY driven and not ideologues, well, then knock yourself out.
From Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/haroldfurchtgottroth/2014/10/12/fcc-plans-stealth-internet-tax-increase/[^]
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: I'm not going to get into the politics of the last 6 years, but a goodly number of Americans don't trust their government.
6 years? Try 238. Earlier than that, we'll have to explore the distrust of the population in England, and that goes back a lot more.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I stand corrected  but I don't think you're really disagreeing. More like adding an exclamation point.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, that's not true.
People did trust their government once.
Literally.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of the the extra fees from the rule change. In my opinion it is likely to be the lesser of two evils, preventing the comcasts and time warners of the world from extorting their own fees from other services.
As far as US politics goes, the only ways forward that I see are educating people so they aren't swayed by the political advertising, or finding some way to greatly reduce the flow of money into the system.
|
|
|
|
|
I've got an idea more likely to get his attention. Point out that Net Neutrality is about making sure that Comcast can't decide that since they own MSNBC (or WTF it's been rebranded to), the left-most leaning major national news source, they could decide that to make themselves more money from banner adds they'll redirect all attempts to visit FoxNews.com to Msnbc.com instead.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
So, on the advise of SO, I installed RazorEngine so that I could generate some HTML directly from a template to create the body of a registration email. Why this can't be done in some simple way with Razor directly is beyond me, but nooo, one of the suggestions was to use RazorEngine.
So I use the package manger to install it, it does a couple updates and I get this effing message:
Inheritance security rules violated by type: 'System.Web.WebPages.Razor.WebPageRazorHost'. Derived types must either match the security accessibility of the base type or be less accessible.
So I google around and everyone tells me to remove the dependency in web.config. Sure enough, that works.
But NOW, after I deploy the app to WinHost (I don't think this is their fault), I get:
Could not load file or assembly 'System.Web.Razor, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35' or one of its dependencies. The located assembly's manifest definition does not match the assembly reference. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80131040)
But of course. That makes total sense. NOT. 
So then I figure I ought to fix the root cause of the problem locally and not just delete the dependency in web.config. So I find this post.[^]
Useful. Especially this (regarding my original error):
Which could not be resolved by the solution listed in the reference, however after doing some research I found my answer in the update release notes. The "Removal of security transparent attribute. Note: This is a breaking change, and makes Razor 3 incompatible with MVC4 and earlier, while Razor 2 is incompatible with MVC5 or assemblies compiled against MVC5".
OMFG. Really? So how the eff do I install Razor 2, I really don't give a rat's arse about compatibility with MVC5 (which, when reading about how to install that, looks like yet another rabbit hole of a nightmare I don't want to go down.)
Wow Microsoft. In attempting to copy the garbage that is Ruby on Rails, I believe you have taken what was a slightly smelly pile of refuse and turned it into something that looks like
this[^] - and that's us, picking through the shyte that is MVC and Razor.
Not to mention that the deployment doesn't work right (THAT might be an issue with WinHost), the database migration stuff is a joke (as in it doesn't work) and my foray into Entity Framework is reminding me why I don't use that pile of crap.
And no, my rant is not over yet.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Now you know why I thank the great Ghu I am close enough to retirement that I can possibly duck the whole MVC pile of crap. I honestly don't think it is possible to be too disparaging of the current CSS/HTML development stack
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, one of the issues I ran into was that I needed to use the -safe flag with nuget update or it would push everything to the absolute latest version, breaking references when other projects had different dependencies that didn't allow the latest version of shared libraries. The fact that nuget needs a -safe flag that isn't on by default is a huge red flag to me.
I've run into similar problems with grunt and ruby trying to get sass generating map files while still being compatible with bourbon.io and compass, but I had to force the upgrades instead of holding it back.
Also, I've used a library to use razor as an email content engine, but the latest version requires access to a full httpContext object. The mock object the older libraries used wasn't sufficient, so I had to schedule a web service call back to the same website as the timer is running under so that it would execute with a full httpContext. 
|
|
|
|
|
Alright, here's my four step tutorial on how to solve all your IT related issues:
Step 1: Throw computer out of the window.
Step 2: Enjoy a moment of pure joy.
Step 3: Realize you needed that computer for work.
Step 4: Live the rest of your life as a poor, but happy, hobo.
You can thank me later 
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: but happy, hobo.
I am sorely tempted.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
It's the unholy mess that is ASP MVC that is the reason I use the MEAN stack. It's so much more straightforward to use, especially when combined with Typescript.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: It's the unholy mess that is ASP MVC that is the reason I use the MEAN stack.
I just encountered that acronym last week. Apparently there's a new book on Amazon on it.
While I find myself very critical of the NoSQL movement, I'm also interested from people I respect as to their thoughts on it -- so, what are your experiences with MongoDB?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
As long as you use Mongo for the right problem, it's very powerful and remarkably straightforward to use, especially if you use the Mongoose package. Certain problems require you to go outside of Mongo - for instance, when it comes to full text, I tend to use ElasticSearch instead because the full text support in Mongo isn't that clever. The hardest thing is to stop thinking of data in the way you think of it for an RDBMS. Once you get around that, and understand what concepts like map-reduce actually means, then you're well on your way to developing a good understanding of it. I'm delivering a talk on Socket.IO next month where I'll show MEN part of that stack (I'm not using Angular for the demo), and I'll hopefully be showing how easy it is to use this stack.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I'm delivering a talk on Socket.IO next month where I'll show MEN part of that stack (I'm not using Angular for the demo), and I'll hopefully be showing how easy it is to use this stack.
If anyone records the talk, I'd be interested in watching it!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I'm hoping the talks will be recorded (I'm also giving another one on developing applications with Intel's RealSense Technology). They are at this[^] event.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: As long as you use Mongo for the right problem,
Yep.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Once you get around that, and understand what concepts like map-reduce actually means, then you're well on your way to developing a good understanding of it.
Keeping in mind of course that this is only true if it is still based on your first requirement that it is used for right problem in the first place. If it isn't used for the right problem then one tends to end up with 'solutions' that are similar to medieval surgery (hack and hope it lives.)
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Keeping in mind of course that this is only true if it is still based on your first requirement that it is used for right problem in the first place
Oh, definitely. There is a temptation to see everything as a document shaped problem if you aren't too rigorous with yourself.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
