I'm going to try to be nice and give you some advice: don't write like that. Constructing these overwrought sentences with the dashes and the semicolons and the vocabulary and whatnot just makes you look like an insecure sophomore trying to cover up inexperience with excessive verbiage. Which is probably accurate, but oh well. The purpose of writing isn't to make you look smart, it's to communicate your thoughts clearly and convincingly, and writing to show off all your fancy college-boy book lernin' is just going to antagonize your audience. You're still in school, my advice is to take a writing course and listen to what they say.
'Over' is already an adverb. If you want to modify a word with 'over', combine the two words or use a hyphen, as in 'over-concise'. Although 'overly' is now common usage, it is still looked down upon by the literati.
There is nothing wrong with using dashes, but if you do, use the correct dash. The em dash is U+2014. If you cannot type an em dash, the custom is to use two en dashes.
If you care, try switching many of these sentences from passive to active voice. It helps to tighten up your writing. Sometimes it helps for dramatic effect, but excessive use of passive voice slows down your writing. Also, watch your redundancies and overuse of certain words.
>Constructing these overwrought sentences with the dashes and the semicolons and the vocabulary and whatnot just makes you look like an insecure sophomore trying to cover up inexperience with excessive verbiage.
You're uncomfortable with how somebody speaks, so you call them insecure. Classic.
By the way, there was nothing sophisticated about the content or construction of the parent post. And if there was, maybe you should consider carrying the burden of trying to understand it instead of dragging us down to your idea of how people ought to communicate.
85% dollar-wise, or 85% of items purchased? Because I would argue that men tend to make fewer, but more expensive purchases, eg big tv, high end stereo, etc. I would still believe that things are skewed a bit since married women tend to make more of the purchasing decisions than their husbands (from what i understand), but 85% seems awfully high to me.
Check the link, it is extremely fascinating, but this is the relevant section:
>Women account for 85% of all consumer purchases including everything from autos to health care:
91% of New Homes
66% PCs
92% Vacations
80% Healthcare
65% New Cars
89% Bank Accounts
93% Food
93 % OTC Pharmaceuticals
American women spend about $5 trillion annually…
Over half the U.S. GDP
The list must be referencing "items purchased" rather than "dollar-wise". It is by no means definitive of the answer who makes more expensive purchases, but if women are buying 9 out of every 10 new houses, 65% of new cars, and 80% of healthcare plans what big ticket items are left for men to buy to outspend women?
Now the part at the end about $5 trillion being 1/2 the US GDP, might not be an error but be more telling of when these statistics are from (US GDP currently closer to $15T). Nevertheless like in my OP, the numbers are mind blowing, consider the following:
GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports)
Or
1/2 GDP = women spending = (private consumption - women spending) + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports)
What, you've never gone and hacked an interpreter because you were mildly annoyed by something? I don't think he actually means for it to be used in production.
I started using repustate's sentiment analysis for a project recently and it was impressively easy to get started with, although the sentiment scores can seem a little arbitrary at times.
I don't think anyone thinks that it's wrong to try and give your children a better position in life than they would be able to achieve through their ability alone, just that it's beneficial to society as a whole to minimize this effect. Prisoner's dilemma and all that.
This is sort of an odd statement since the way a piece of code is run is directly related to how it is parsed. If an alternative implementation like Topaz parses something differently than MRI then you'll have code that does two different things on two different interpreters. Having a complicated and informally specified grammar makes this a lot harder to avoid.
how is it necessary to make racist comments in order to "get shit done"? will your production systems all crash if you don't make a minimum of 5 jokes about nappy hair and malt liquor a day? have you encountered a nasty bug in rails that can only be fixed by exposing it to clips of Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's?
It's not a matter of it being necessary or unnecessary. It's a matter of letting small things slide or taking them in strides. Haven't you ever seen a movie where men jostle each other and call each other things too crass to type in here? Do they whine and run to the boss about how "mean they were"?
Of course not, because clearly in this case it's just a case of men being men and flinging the usual shit at each other. I'm surprised I have to spell this out.
The idea is that BY LAW, you should not have to be subjected to that kind of environment in the workplace. If you don't like it, then get the law changed.
