The argument, overall, seems a little tautological and obvious, but maybe you can't avoid saying in essence "we don't have good security requirements, so this increases the risk of security incidents".
Any business operations performed under this weak and insecure model of service delivery would make NADRA unattractive for business and in the process deviating from its original and evolutionary purpose of providing reliable, trustworthy and efficient services to its customers and People of abc
is it fine or do i need to first explain what is insecure service delivery model
@Saladin It depends what your audience expects and who they are, too. I usually feel that if it's for a few people who are used to pages of prose that they barely read, it may not be worth the effort; if it's for a lot of people or it's very important that your audience be swayed by your argument, it is worth more time to be succinct.
@Saladin If "service delivery" is a common term where you are, I think saying it is insecure makes sense. (I wouldn't introduce "service delivery" without explanation at my work because we don't really use that phrase.)
I keep forgetting to look up the instructions for how to change Roomba back to English, but I have the worst time understanding her cries in Spanish from across the house.
All of these that have swishhhhh noises give me an involuntary spine tingle but I don't like it. I never make it through the videos. I wonder if there's something wrong with me.
Is it possible to use an expression like "from now on" or "from X on" for objects? For example, suppose that there are ten objects put next to each other, and I want to tell someone to select one of them after the third one. Is it possible to say: "select one of the objects from the third one on"?
@Meysam I wouldn't know for sure if you meant to include the third one. I would probably only say "from the x on" with things that naturally go a progression like streets: "From Main street on, it's only five more streets until you see the tree where you turn left"
Or in the expression "from there on out", I guess.
The only clothes of mine I care much about having right side out and folded are actually undershirts and underwear, so that if I need to get dressed bleary-eyed I can do it without thinking.
I can always figure out the shirts and pants, but undergarments are a pain when you're tired, I think. And I hate hate hate them inside out if they have seams or something that chafe.
Well, even more bleary-eyed than usual.
I don't like to set clothes out the night before, I like them to be there in the dresser.
Gawd, this consulting firm we're working with wants to add Knockout.js to the OVER 9000 frameworks they're already using. Am I too much of a purist because I prefer to write jQuery plugins to do what I need?
I mean, why add another leaky abstraction layer to the mix? What does that help?
I have resisted getting one more laundry basket because I know I would just leave it on the bedroom floor with wrinkled clean laundry in it.
I also have these ridiculously small laundry baskets so they fit down my basement stairs, you know, along with my arms around them to carry them. They fit basically one load of laundry (sometimes a little overflowingly depending on what it is). I feel like I'm always carrying them someplace.
essentially, don't just use it for using it's sake. Which I guess you know. Me and frameworks rarely get along anyway. I've yet to use a javascript one
My work is nearly the opposite, @Rob; I've had the hardest time convincing anyone to hop on the framework train, even though no one has time to write anything and it would probably help
See, writing front-end code like jQuery plugins is the fun part for me. MVVM frameworks seem like crutches to enable middle-tier developers to do things on the front end.
Christ, they can't take a piss without reaching for a framework.
Of course I'm seeing things from the grass-is-greener side, but it does seem like the grass has at least been watered recently with stuff people are already using that works and has some sort of documentation
@MattЭллен I took a long time to cotton to jQuery, because of my bias against frameworks. Then I realized jQuery just cleans up a lot of things that are painful in vanilla Javascript and lets you get on with your life. It's pretty minimal, and very efficient.
I also don't buy into the "speeding up Javascript" thing. Javascript is really fast, unless you're stupidly adding elements to the DOM one by one in nested I also don't buy into the "speeding up Javascript" thing. Javascript is really fast, unless you're stupidly adding elements to the DOM one by one in nested for loops.
@MattЭллен I just wrote a typeahead jQuery plugin that does everything, can be registered with any inputs using different datasources, including making service calls, and it's 2.63k minified.
You know like in the search input of your browser, you start typing and it starts offering you suggestions based on what you've already typed? That's a typeahead.
BTW, my typeahead can give multiple inputs different datasources, but you can override any of them at any time without disturbing the registered defaults.
And it only adds one element to the page, which gets repopulated at every call.
All my wood floor in the house is in pretty decent shape, so we're not touching that for like ever. Except the stairs/upstairs hall carpet has gotta go soon and I'll find out what's under there. And the kitchen and addition don't have wood, but instead the ugliest, cheapest looking fake wood patterned vinyl flooring ever invented.
@Matt: Oh, I see where he's going with this. He's trying to get you to stop chaining jQuery functions together and using a map/reduce model. Not bad if you have lots of stuff to do, but totally unnecessary for most things.
@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 For a moment I thought you were talking about design patterns. But, no, I haven't tried the Singleton scotch whisky yet. But if my liquor store has it, I will try it.
I've lately been drinking the Glenmorangie version that is aged in sherry casks. Interesting notes.
Nah, someone posted a question on ELL about a grammatical construct that doesn't exist in english. I thought I understood their question but then I read the wiki article about the construct and it sounds like it's actually something completely different than their question
I want to translate ktoś nie doczekał się (na X) i zrezygnował (== "someone was waiting [for X, and X didn't happen] and resigned").
I cannot find the right negation for wait; maybe there is no equivalent.
I found some translations that very close to what I want to say.
He did not live and ...
Maybe ...
In vain
... might be suitable. It's hard to tell from the example. You were waiting for the sun but then darkness fell. You were waiting for the sun but it did not appear. You were waiting for the sun but something else happened.
You were waiting for the sun but it was in vain.
Read the comments. I'm not gonna repost the entire thread.
I'm afraid you are approaching it all wrong, @Chameleon. Translation does not work that way, you cannot hope to translate your sentence word for word in whatever language you please. You can have an exact translation of doczekałem into another Slavic language, like e.g. Russian; but not into a Germanic one, like English or German, because they are simply wired completely differently from Polish. For these, Teylyn's answer is exactly right. Take it and run with it. — RegDwighтyesterday
Yup. I got the prefix part from reading the wiki article he linked, but then it didn't seem to be the same question as was in the actual question so I wasn't sure. Matt posted "in vain" as an answer to the ELL question as well. That's as close as you're going to get to the negation, I think.
I want to translate ktoś nie doczekał się (na X) i zrezygnował (== "someone was waiting [for X, and X didn't happen] and resigned").
I cannot find the right negation for wait; maybe there is no equivalent.
I found some translations that very close to what I want to say.
He did not live and ...
Maybe ...
In vain
... might be suitable. It's hard to tell from the example. You were waiting for the sun but then darkness fell. You were waiting for the sun but it did not appear. You were waiting for the sun but something else happened.
You were waiting for the sun but it was in vain.
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…