I didn't intend it to be. I advised the questioner to simply do what I did myself : ignore the definition that Mateusz Warcholinski wrote which is open to misinterpretation (as this HN thread shows and Mateusz has acknowledged) and simply go to balsamiq.com.
After studying Balsamiq, work backwards from that to get an idea of what he meant by "wireframe" and whether or not it has "functionality".
> all your problems go away. Well, save the spaces, that's never going to happen.
Spaces in filenames are fine. The only strange thing is that, as it turns out, shells have this hidden easter-egg/anti-feature where you can actually leave out the quotes around filenames under certain, special edge-case scenarios. One of those is when the filename contains no ampersands, quotation marks, asterisks, dollar-signs, parentheses, backslashes, newlines, or, you guessed it, spaces! In fact, this special "no quote mode" also contains another special, embedded mode where you can still use those characters, but put backslashes before them! Since this layering of tricks leads to funky, confusing-looking commands, it's obviously much better to just stick with the regular mode of quoting everything.
Of course, the above is quite tongue-in-cheek, but its the mental-mode I specifically try to adopt: "occasionally, you might get away with leaving out the quotes"; compared to the seemingly more common "you need to add quotes in these cases".
Still, this doesn't eliminate the problem of single-quotes in filenames never going away! Whilst it only requires one character code to be escaped, it's still accomplished in a pretty funky way: "'" becomes "'\''"; we first close the string, then use a backslash to write a literal "'", then we start a new string ;)
You could use a shell that magically handles all the escaping for you either while typing/pasting for some programs (curl, grep etc) when not in quotes and tab completes with a selector so you don't have to think about spaces, special chars, etc:
Nah, we're not really worried about those treaties, we're going to send our little, "thank you, but we will no longer be complying with Section XXXXX, in YYYY)". Decriminalizing is simply taking it off the current schedule, and removing it from existing laws.
Legalization requires a whole framework of laws to be created. You could piggyback off cigarettes of alcohol, but should you? Those are the discussions that will be heard over the next sever months.
Sounds plausible that it takes some time to come up with a reasonable-ish framework for legal production, distribution, and consumption. Most of the US states that legalized seemed to jump in with an attitude more like legalize it now and figure out the details as we go. It seems to have worked okay, but could be seen as being kinda risky.
I also think that many people way overestimate the importance of international law and treaties. There is no court with any teeth on these things, and nobody gets any brownie points for following treaties. The only enforcement mechanism is what other countries care to do about any violations they perceive, which could be anything from nothing at all for blatant violations to sanctions, trade war, or real war for minor violations or even not going along enthusiastically enough.
No, they could not pass it on day one. Getting legislation together like this takes support building in other areas of government, and getting it right so it isn't toppled because of flawed wording takes crafting. They need to bring people on board and do it well or it falls apart. It takes time.
You're confusing the two. Decriminalization needs nothing more than to be removed from the controlled substances list, and being removed from the criminal code. It's easy peasy, and could be done easily within a week. You don't need anything because it's no longer criminal, you just stop prosecuting them. Quick announcement to the feeds on the streets, and you're running.
Legalization on the other hand, which is what the current gov is going for, is legalization. And that requires all those special departments, policies, procedures, laws, etc...
Edit: I thought you were the one with your definitions reversed but it seem news organizations and stories actually seem to also use contradictory definition.
Those two articles don't seem to contradict each other. They are both using legalization and decriminalization in the same way (i'm pretty sure).
The globalnews article talks a bit about how the Liberals tried decriminalizing it in the past and failed. And Justin Trudeau saying why they won't decriminalize before they legalize it. But the focus is on the legalization/regulation of it next year. It is not using those two interchangeably.
I don't get it. Are you saying in parliamentary systems legislation is only passed the day a new government assumes power? What do they do until the next time elections are called?
He just means they didnt have to wait for anything or anyone. If they're being well behaved they will have some due course and debate etc. But in Harper's government we often saw how fast things could go through the gov't with a majority, little debate/discussion or public notice even. Yay canada.
Technical people? Hell, even us blokes writing the software have no clue. I have 20 years in this, but guestamating costs and timelines? Nope. I'm a little better, but I mean, graduating from t-ball to little league.
The only time I hit it on the head, is when I'm doing a project, the type of which, I've done before. And I tend to avoid those.
I still use the rule that my mum taught me: Take your best guess at how long you'll take to do the job, and double it. That's the number you tell your team. Double that, and that's the number you tell the client.
Single page application? Can you explain why the existence of next/prev relationships would break these? I would expect such a site to simply not use this. It's definitely nice for linearly-linked content on supporting browsers (e.g. old opera, as mentioned elwewhere in this thread).
Well, look at it this way, when creating a SPA, you're running everything in a single place. A single HTML page. In some instances, it makes sense to push the state to the query string, but often it doesn't, and more often still are the occasions developers haven't thought about it. So every time you hit the back button, and weren't where you thought you would be, that's the same issue. SPA frameworks's are getting better at that, but this still happens to me on the daily.
Awesome, though I'd love to see a line or two under the title with the show notes (if they have them embedded). For those not already knowing about the hilarious podcast, The title is precious little to go on.
Bluetooth didn't work like a damn for music when the Hi-Fi came out. Spec was only 3 years baked, and wasn't in anything, certainly not the iPods everyone had been buying at the time. We wouldn't see an iPod with bluetooth for another couple years.
