Search Results

Search found 574 results on 23 pages for 'iniquities of evil men'.

Page 2/23 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Are women worse developers than men? [closed]

    - by Ekaterina
    Hi people, I am a software engineer and a woman. I constantly keep hearing all these jokes around me, about women in programming. They (they - stands for male colleagues) keep pointing out the differences in thinking between men and women. The truth is that when I started working as a developer, my colleagues gave a hard time only because I am a woman. They automatically assumed that I want to do only html and styling, and didn't even me giving me the chance to do something different. I am a .NET programmer and I really disliked (and still dislike) front-end developing. I do agree men and women think differently, but I don't agree that necessarily is a bad thing. Different approach of problems/goals brings more ideas and diversity. I really believe that there are good developer and bad developers despite the male/female factor. I am curious to hear overall opinion though. Would you not hire a woman developer only because is a woman? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • How to effectively gather info about how players play my HTML5 game?

    - by Bane
    I'm finishing another HTML5 game, and this time I'd like to do some spying business on the players... Mostly just basic stuff: when they are playing, for how long, what upgrades they are buying the most and so on. Now, my first idea was just to collect this information during the gameplay, and then have a Javascript function fire when they close the tab/browser, and said function would send it to my server via Socket.io. This, of course, wouldn't work, because anyone who takes a look at the code would realize it and could start sending a tonne of false info which would mess up my statistics. Questions: Is there a way to effectively do this? If yes, what kind of info should I be looking for, aside from stuff I already mentioned?

    Read the article

  • Does GIT have evil twin issues?

    - by Senthil A Kumar
    In ClearCase evil twin occurs when two files are found with the same name in two different versions of the directory, and If the element OIDs are different but the names are the same. In GIT the SHA1 id is always unique and file with same name always have different SHA1 id’s. We don’t have a concept of Evil twins, but there are likely cases where there is chance for 2 or more developers creating a file with different contents with same filename in the same directory. During merge, when both files are completely different, there are chances of the developers to keep his changes alone and leave other changes resulting in code loss. Can anyone let me know if there will be issues in GIT similar to ClearCase or sine each SHA1 id is unique there won't be any Evil twin issues in GIT.

    Read the article

  • Defining - and dealing with - Evil

    - by Chris Becke
    As a software developer one sometimes gets feature requests that seem to be in some kind of morally grey area. Sometimes one can deflect them, or implement them in a way that feels less 'evil' - sometimes - on reflection - while the feature request 'feels' wrong theres no identifiable part of it that actually causes harm. Sometimes one feels a feature is totally innocent but various anti virus products start tagging one as malware. For example - I personally consider EULAs to (a) hopefully be unenforceable and (b) a means by which rights are REMOVED from consumers. However Anti Virus scanners frequently mark as malware any kind of download agent that does not display a EULA. Which to me is the result of a curious kind of double think. What I want to know is - are there any online (or offline) resources that cover evil software development practices? How can I know if a software practice that I consider dodgy is in fact evil enough to consider fighting?

    Read the article

  • Why is the 'if' statement considered evil?

    - by Vadim
    I just came from Simple Design and Testing Conference. In one of the session we were talking about evil keywords in programming languages. Corey Haines, who proposed the subject, was convinced that if statement is absolute evil. His alternative was to create functions with predicates. Can you please explain to me why if is evil. I understand that you can write very ugly code abusing if. But I don't believe that it's that bad.

    Read the article

  • When is JavaScript's eval() not evil?

    - by Richard Turner
    I'm writing some JavaScript to parse user-entered functions (for spreadsheet-like functionality). Having parsed the formula I could convert it into JavaScript and run eval() on it to yield the result. However, I've always shied away from using eval() if I can avoid it because it's evil (and, rightly or wrongly, I've always thought it is even more evil in JavaScript because the code to be evaluated might be changed by the user). Obviously one has to use eval() to parse JSON (I presume that JS libraries use eval() for this somewhere, even if they run the JSON through a regex check first), but when else, other than when manipulating JSON, it is OK to use eval()?

    Read the article

  • Why is Yahoo Indexing Bot considered as "evil"?

    - by bigstylee
    After reading and commenting on this question PHP Library for Keeping your site index by Google, Bing, etc, I was curious to look at StackOverFlow's sitemap. This returned a 404 error which I am guessing is just a protected page by determining if your are a Index Bot or simply doesnt exists. This then lead me to look at the robots.txt for StackOverFlow. I was surprised to see the comment "Yahoo bot is evil" along with a couple other Indexing bots (Spinn3r and KSCrawler) . I am unfamilular with Spinn3r and KSCrawler but my question is, why are these bots (particular Yahoo) considered as evil? Surely any and all indexing of any Search Engine is a good thing?

    Read the article

  • Which specific programming activities do women, on average, perform better than men? [closed]

    - by blueberryfields
    Following a recent discussion with female associates in hiring positions for software development/engineering positions, I found out that this kind of information would be incredibly useful to helping make sure that the workforce shows a gender balance. So I went looking. I've found various literature speaking about risk-taking behaviour and patterns, and other statistical differences between men and women when it comes to work performance. See for example this article related to hedge fund management. I have yet to see any such comparison in the computing field. To restate the question: Which specific programming activities do women, on average, perform better than men? Please back up your answers with specific details, preferably by linking to relevant research or, failing that, explaining what you're basing the information on.

    Read the article

  • Visible Keylogger (ie not evil)

    - by Ben Haley
    I want keylogging software on my laptop for lifelogging purposes. But the software I can find is targeted towards stealth activity. Can anyone recommend a keylogging software targeted towards personal backup. Ideal Functionality Runs publicly (like in the task bar). Easy to turn off (via keyboard shortcut is best... at least via button click) Encrypted log Fast Free Cross platform ( windows at least ) The best I have found is pykeylogger which does not attempt to be stealthy, but does not attempt to be visible either. I want a keylogger focused on transparency, speed, and security so I can safely record myself. *note: Christian has a similar question with a different emphasis

    Read the article

  • Is paravirtualization evil?

    - by Daniel
    I have an VMWare ESX Server v3.5 with a few virtualized Debian Lenny VMs (kernel 2.6.22 with vmi) running Apache Tomcat 5.5. I enabled paravirtualization, and Disk IO increased from about 240MB/s to 380MB/s, making me a happy admin. The problem now is that my apache tomcat becomes deadlocked during startup, running with 200% CPU (I have 2 CPUS assigned to the VM), and don't know how to get both: A stable system and a fast system. I somewhere heared that paravirtualization is legacy anyway and won't be available on newer ESX servers. Is there a replacement for this seemingly performance-improving option, or is it discontinued becauses it is just unstable? What is the state of paravirtualization? Should I ignore it completely? Thanks for all answers in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why are mutable structs evil?

    - by divo
    Following the discussions here on SO I already read several times the remark that mutable structs are evil (like in the answer to this question). What's the actual problem with mutability and structs?

    Read the article

  • Are database triggers evil?

    - by WW
    Are database triggers a bad idea? In my experience they are evil, because they can result in surprising side effects, and are difficult to debug (especially when one trigger fires another). Often developers do not even think of looking if there is a trigger. On the other hand, it seems like if you have logic that must occur evertime a new FOO is created in the database then the most foolproof place to put it is an insert trigger on the FOO table. The only time we're using triggers is for really simple things like setting the ModifiedDate.

    Read the article

  • Why exactly is eval evil?

    - by Jay
    I know that Lisp and Scheme programmers usually say that eval should be avoided unless strictly necessary. I´ve seen the same recommendation for several programming languages, but I´ve not yet seen a list of clear arguments against the use of eval. Where can I find an account of the potential problems of using eval? For example, I know the problems of GOTO in procedural programming (makes programs unreadable and hard to maintain, makes security problems hard to find, etc), but I´ve never seen the arguments against eval. Interestingly, the same arguments against GOTO should be valid against continuations, but I see that Shemers, for example, won´t say that continuations are "evil" -- you should just be careful when using them. They´re much more likely to frown upon code using eval than upon code using continuations (as far as I can see -- I could be wrong).

    Read the article

  • Is static universally "evil" for unit testing and if so why does resharper recommend it?

    - by Vaccano
    I have found that there are only 3 ways to unit test (mock/stub) dependencies that are static in C#.NET: Moles TypeMock JustMock Given that two of these are not free and one has not hit release 1.0, mocking static stuff is not too easy. Does that make static methods and such "evil" (in the unit testing sense)? And if so, why does resharper want me to make anything that can be static, static? (Assuming resharper is not also "evil".) Clarification: I am talking about the scenario when you want to unit test a method and that method calls a static method in a different unit/class. By most definitions of unit testing, if you just let the method under test call the static method in the other unit/class then you are not unit testing, you are integration testing. (Useful, but not a unit test.)

    Read the article

  • Getting rid of the evil delay caused by ShellExecute

    - by korona
    This is something that's been bothering me a while and there just has to be a solution to this. Every time I call ShellExecute to open an external file (be it a document, executable or a URL) this causes a very long lockup in my program before ShellExecute spawns the new process and returns. Does anyone know how to solve or work around this? EDIT: And as the tags might indicate, this is on Win32 using C++.

    Read the article

  • Are free operator->* overloads evil?

    - by Potatoswatter
    I was perusing section 13.5 after refuting the notion that built-in operators do not participate in overload resolution, and noticed that there is no section on operator->*. It is just a generic binary operator. Its brethren, operator->, operator*, and operator[], are all required to be non-static member functions. This precludes definition of a free function overload to an operator commonly used to obtain a reference from an object. But the uncommon operator->* is left out. In particular, operator[] has many similarities. It is binary (they missed a golden opportunity to make it n-ary), and it accepts some kind of container on the left and some kind of locator on the right. Its special-rules section, 13.5.5, doesn't seem to have any actual effect except to outlaw free functions. (And that restriction even precludes support for commutativity!) So, for example, this is perfectly legal (in C++0x, remove obvious stuff to translate to C++03): #include <utility> #include <iostream> #include <type_traits> using namespace std; template< class F, class S > typename common_type< F,S >::type operator->*( pair<F,S> const &l, bool r ) { return r? l.second : l.first; } template< class T > T & operator->*( pair<T,T> &l, bool r ) { return r? l.second : l.first; } template< class T > T & operator->*( bool l, pair<T,T> &r ) { return l? r.second : r.first; } int main() { auto x = make_pair( 1, 2.3 ); cerr << x->*false << " " << x->*4 << endl; auto y = make_pair( 5, 6 ); y->*(0) = 7; y->*0->*y = 8; // evaluates to 7->*y = y.second cerr << y.first << " " << y.second << endl; } I can certainly imagine myself giving into temp[la]tation. For example, scaled indexes for vector: v->*matrix_width[2][5] = x; Did the standards committee forget to prevent this, was it considered too ugly to bother, or are there real-world use cases?

    Read the article

  • Why is JFormattedTextField evil?

    - by kwutchak
    Hi, In this question Is there any way to accept only numeric values in a JTextField? one of the answers suggested that JFormattedTextField had issues. I've not yet used it, but could somebody please expand (or disagree) on the issues with this class? Thanks...

    Read the article

  • Is assert evil?

    - by dehmann
    The Go language creators write: Go doesn't provide assertions. (...) Programmers use them as a crutch to avoid thinking about proper error handling and reporting. What is your opinion about this?

    Read the article

  • Is reverse engineering evil?

    - by Amir Arad
    Lately I've been pondering on how a specific beloved old game actually works. I had some mild progress, but then a friend pointed out that if I really loved the game and appreciate it, I wouldn't try to reverse-engineer it. Note that the game is long considered an abandonware and is offerd for download publicly in lawful game sites, and I have no commercial / other large scale intentions - just to learn and "mess around" with it. Did I miss something? Is there an ethical taboo regarding reverse-engeneering? Alternatively, is there a legal issue?

    Read the article

  • Getters and Setters: Code smell, Necessary Evil, or Can't Live Without Them [closed]

    - by Avery Payne
    Possible Duplicate: Allen Holub wrote “You should never use get/set functions”, is he correct? Is there a good, no, a very good reason, to go through all the trouble of using getters and setters for object-oriented languages? What's wrong with just using a direct reference to a property or method? Is there some kind of "semantical coverup" that people don't want to talk about in polite company? Was I just too tired and fell asleep when someone walked out and said "Thou Shalt Write Copious Amounts of Code to Obtain Getters and Setters"? Follow-up after a year: It seems to be a common occurrence with Java, less so with Python. I'm beginning to wonder if this is more of a cultural phenomena (related to the limitations of the language) rather than "sage advice". The -1 question score is complete for-the-lulz as far as I am concerned. It's interesting that there are specific questions that are downvoted, not because they are "bad questions", but rather, because they hit someone's raw nerve.

    Read the article

  • Focus stealing is evil.

    - by lunixbochs
    A quick Google search for solutions to Focus Stealing in Windows reveals two main result categories: People suggesting incomplete solutions involving the ForegroundLockTimeout registry entry (or TweakUI, which I believe simply changes the aforementioned registry entry), which isn't very effective. Incessant hordes of Windows users complaining about it. It's particularly annoying in two common scenarios: Something triggers a program to popup a dialog window in the background while a fullscreen app is focused, causing the fullscreen app to minimize. A window steals focus while you are typing, stealing all of your keystrokes. If you happen to press Space, Enter, or trigger a keyboard shortcut (like Y for Yes), it can cause completely undesirable outcomes. What creative solutions can be applied to fix this problem for either or both of these scenarios?

    Read the article

  • E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

    - by Joel
    I cant install or uppdate anything on my system 12.04 I get the error... installArchives() failed: dpkg: error processing libqt4-xmlpatterns (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3) dpkg: error processing libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-declarative:i386: libqt4-declarative:i386 depends on libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-declarative:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-declarative: libqt4-declarative depends on libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Version of libqt4-xmlpatterns on system is 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2. dpkg: error processing libqt4-declarative (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqtgui4:i386: libqtgui4:i386 depends on libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-declarative:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqtgui4:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqtgui4: No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure. No apport report written because the error message indicates its a followup error from a previous failure. No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already No apport report written because MaxReports is reached already libqtgui4 depends on libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-declarative is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqtgui4 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-designer: libqt4-designer depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-designer (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-designer:i386: libqt4-designer:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-designer:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-opengl: libqt4-opengl depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-opengl (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-opengl:i386: libqt4-opengl:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-opengl:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-qt3support: libqt4-qt3support depends on libqt4-designer (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-designer is not configured yet. libqt4-qt3support depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-qt3support (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-qt3support:i386: libqt4-qt3support:i386 depends on libqt4-designer (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-designer:i386 is not configured yet. libqt4-qt3support:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-qt3support:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-scripttools:i386: libqt4-scripttools:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-scripttools:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-svg: libqt4-svg depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-svg (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-svg:i386: libqt4-svg:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-svg:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: libqt4-xmlpatterns libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 libqt4-declarative:i386 libqt4-declarative libqtgui4:i386 libqtgui4 libqt4-designer libqt4-designer:i386 libqt4-opengl libqt4-opengl:i386 libqt4-qt3support libqt4-qt3support:i386 libqt4-scripttools:i386 libqt4-svg libqt4-svg:i386 Error in function: dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-declarative: libqt4-declarative depends on libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Version of libqt4-xmlpatterns on system is 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2. dpkg: error processing libqt4-declarative (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: error processing libqt4-xmlpatterns (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3) dpkg: error processing libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2) dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqtgui4: libqtgui4 depends on libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-declarative is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqtgui4 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-declarative:i386: libqt4-declarative:i386 depends on libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-declarative:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-svg: libqt4-svg depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-svg (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-opengl: libqt4-opengl depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-opengl (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-designer: libqt4-designer depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-designer (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-qt3support: libqt4-qt3support depends on libqt4-designer (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-designer is not configured yet. libqt4-qt3support depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-qt3support (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqtgui4:i386: libqtgui4:i386 depends on libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqt4-declarative:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqtgui4:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-svg:i386: libqt4-svg:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-svg:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-opengl:i386: libqt4-opengl:i386 depends on libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3); however: Package libqtgui4:i386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing libqt4-opengl:i386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of libqt4-designer:i386: joel@Joel-PC:~$ sudo apt-get install -f [sudo] password for joel: Läser paketlistor... Färdig Bygger beroendeträd Läser tillståndsinformation... Färdig Korrigerar beroenden.... Färdig Följande paket har installerats automatiskt och är inte längre nödvändiga: kde-l10n-sv language-pack-kde-sv-base language-pack-kde-zh-hans-base calligra-l10n-engb calligra-l10n-sv calligra-l10n-zhcn language-pack-kde-en kde-l10n-engb language-pack-kde-sv language-pack-zh-hans-base kde-l10n-zhcn language-pack-zh-hans language-pack-kde-zh-hans language-pack-kde-en-base Använd "apt-get autoremove" för att ta bort dem. Följande ytterligare paket kommer att installeras: libqt4-xmlpatterns Följande paket kommer att uppgraderas: libqt4-xmlpatterns 1 att uppgradera, 0 att nyinstallera, 0 att ta bort och 22 att inte uppgradera. 15 är inte helt installerade eller borttagna. Behöver hämta 0 B/1 033 kB arkiv. Efter denna åtgärd kommer ytterligare 0 B utrymme användas på disken. Vill du fortsätta [J/n]? J dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-xmlpatterns (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3) dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 (--configure): libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3 cannot be configured because libqt4-xmlpatterns:amd64 is in a different version (4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2) dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-declarative:i386: libqt4-declarative:i386 är beroende av libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-declarative:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-declarative: libqt4-declarative är beroende av libqt4-xmlpatterns (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Versionen av libqt4-xmlpatterns på systemet är 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.2. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-declarative (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqtgui4:i386: libqtgui4:i386 är beroende av libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqt4-declarative:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqtgui4:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar koIngen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. Ingen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. Ingen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. Ingen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. Ingen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. Ingen apport-rapport skrevs därför att felmeddelandet indikerar att det är ett efterföljande fel från ett tidigare problem. nfigurering av libqtgui4: libqtgui4 är beroende av libqt4-declarative (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqt4-declarative har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqtgui4 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-designer: libqt4-designer är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-designer (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-designer:i386: libqt4-designer:i386 är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-designer:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-opengl: libqt4-opengl är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-opengl (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-opengl:i386: libqt4-opengl:i386 är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-opengl:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-qt3support: libqt4-qt3support är beroende av libqt4-designer (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqt4-designer har inte konfigurerats ännu. libqt4-qt3support är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-qt3support (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-qt3support:i386: libqt4-qt3support:i386 är beroende av libqt4-designer (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqt4-designer:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. libqt4-qt3support:i386 är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-qt3support:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-scripttools:i386: libqt4-scripttools:i386 är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-scripttools:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-svg: libqt4-svg är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-svg (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad dpkg: beroendeproblem förhindrar konfigurering av libqt4-svg:i386: libqt4-svg:i386 är beroende av libqtgui4 (= 4:4.8.1-0ubuntu4.3), men: Paketet libqtgui4:i386 har inte konfigurerats ännu. dpkg: fel vid hantering av libqt4-svg:i386 (--configure): beroendeproblem - lämnar okonfigurerad Fel uppstod vid hantering: libqt4-xmlpatterns libqt4-xmlpatterns:i386 libqt4-declarative:i386 libqt4-declarative libqtgui4:i386 libqtgui4 libqt4-designer libqt4-designer:i386 libqt4-opengl libqt4-opengl:i386 libqt4-qt3support libqt4-qt3support:i386 libqt4-scripttools:i386 libqt4-svg libqt4-svg:i386 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

    Read the article

  • Social Engagement: One Size Doesn't Fit Anyone

    - by Mike Stiles
    The key to achieving meaningful social engagement is to know who you’re talking to, know what they like, and consistently deliver that kind of material to them. Every magazine for women knows this. When you read the article titles promoted on their covers, there’s no mistaking for whom that magazine is intended. And yet, confusion still reigns at many brands as to exactly whom they want to talk to, what those people want to hear, and what kind of content they should be creating for them. In most instances, the root problem is brands want to be all things to all people. Their target audience…the world! Good luck with that. It’s 2012, the age of aggregation and custom content delivery. To cope with the modern day barrage of information, people have constructed technological filters so that content they regard as being “for them” is mostly what gets through. Even if your brand is for men and women, young and old, you may want to consider social properties that divide men from women, and young from old. Yes, a man might find something in a women’s magazine that interests him. But that doesn’t mean he’s going to subscribe to it, or buy even one issue. In fact he’ll probably never see the article he’d otherwise be interested in, because in his mind, “This isn’t for me.” It wasn’t packaged for him. News Flash: men and women are different. So it’s a tall order to craft your Facebook Page or Twitter handle to simultaneously exude the motivators for both. The Harris Interactive study “2012 Connecting and Communicating Online: State of Social Media” sheds light on the differing social behaviors and drivers. -65% of women (vs. 59% of men) stay glued to social because they don’t want to miss anything. -25% of women check social when they wake up, before they check email. Only 18% of men check social before e-mail. -95% of women surveyed belong to Facebook vs. 86% of men. -67% of women log in to Facebook once a day or more vs. 54% of men. -Conventional wisdom is Pinterest is mostly a woman-thing, right? That may be true for viewing, but not true for sharing. Men are actually more likely to share on Pinterest than women, 23% to 10%. -The sharing divide extends to YouTube. 68% of women use it mainly for consumption, as opposed to 52% of men. -Women are as likely to have a Twitter account as men, but they’re much less likely to check it often. 54% of women check it once a week compared to 2/3 of men. Obviously, there are some takeaways from this depending on your target. Women don’t want to miss out on anything, so serialized content might be a good idea, right? Promotional posts that lead to a big payoff could keep them hooked. Posts for women might be better served first thing in the morning. If sharing is your goal, maybe male-targeted content is more likely to get those desired shares. And maybe Twitter is a better place to aim your male-targeted content than Facebook. Some grocery stores started experimenting with male-only aisles. The results have been impressive. Why? Because while it’s true men were finding those same items in the store just fine before, now something has been created just for them. They have a place in the store where they belong. Each brand’s strategy and targets are going to differ. The point is…know who you’re talking to, know how they behave, know what they like, and deliver content using any number of social relationship management targeting tools that meets their expectations. If, however, you’re committed to a one-size-fits-all, “our content is for everybody” strategy (or even worse, a “this is what we want to put out and we expect everybody to love it” strategy), your content will miss the mark for more often than it hits. @mikestilesPhoto via stock.schng

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >