Windows 10 also has spam in the start menu ('Suggested Apps'), mysterious phoning-home ('telemetry'), on-by-default web-search in the start-bar search, it deliberately makes it difficult to disable Cortana, and they're pushing UWP, the whole point of which appears to be lock people in to Microsoft's app-store that nobody asked for.
But there's Direct3D 12, which seems neat... if you can't use Vulkan.
Well, Trump is an unthinking, self-aggrandizing, emotionally immature moron, who applies a reality TV show attitude to his presidency. With these qualities in mind, I deem him to be a woefully inadequate president.
That it's still a matter of opinion doesn't mean I'm talking nonsense.
partisan hack
I'm British. I have no particular love for the US's Democratic party. There's a reason virtually everyone outside the US sees Trump as a laughing stock, and it's not because they're all rooting for the Democrats.
The Republican party deserves a damn sight better than Trump. Even Republicans admit this, at least the ones with integrity.
people who say "What Trump said, is really really bad!" but when they're shown that it was say Hillary or Obama who said it suddenly panic when their bubble is popped
Yup, there are plenty of unthinking partisan muppets out there, but I'm not among them.
Or when someone is given a viewpoint/statement that they agree with, and suddenly discover that it's Trump who said it.
Same again. That I think the man is incompetent doesn't mean I disagree with everything he's ever said. Indeed, I support some of his actions as president, such as withdrawing from TPP.
Anyway, if you go digging, you'll find that even Hitler and Mussolini said plenty of agreeable things. That Hitler was a dog-loving vegetarian doesn't mean we now have to avoid dogs and vegetarianism.
The PS3 / 360 "last-gen" versions were essentially a beta test.
Not even close. They invested a great deal of resources in platform-specific optimisations, producing one of the best looking games ever to run on those machines, and went on to patch the game on both platforms for years.
Either I'm misreading you, or you're not making sense.
We're using the word 'why' to refer to the dimensions of the machine-learning data-set, right? So 'blackness' is a dimension, and is a 'why' (i.e. it's something the machine can factor into its decision to permit/deny parole).
Obviously the machine learning machine isn't going to comprehend the nuance of societal racism. That isn't the point. The point is that we're agreed we shouldn't input race data into the system.
the only thing important to factor into the prediction is if he's black.
But we just agreed that we shouldn't factor in whether the convict is black. Are you taking that back?
But that's just it - the 'why' does matter; we're discussing deliberately discarding certain 'whys' from our estimator, in the name of not being racist.
If the reason a convict is denied parole is because he's black (i.e. were he not black then his estimated odds of re-offending would have been below the threshold), then the 'if' behind his denial surely matters.
The only thing that matters in that case if if they'll re-offend, not why they'll re-offend.
I personally don't think metrics like race should be used in the determination, but it would be more accurate if they were.
You've contradicted yourself.
If you believe that racial data should be excluded from the calculation of how likely the convict is to re-offend, that means you value something else alongside whether they'll re-offend.
That's my position, too. Discarding racial data really does diminish the accuracy of the odds-of-re-offending calculation, but we should do it anyway.
most of them (about 90%) are perpetrated by yourself
Neither of which are relevant to the racial disparity question.
Looking at Wikipedia, 52% of the USA's murders (i.e. not including suicides) are committed by black murderers.
Our AC troll presumably thinks that this proves that black people are naturally violent, or some such nonsense. Nope. The USA is very far from a colour-blind society, so the figures aren't all that surprising. Black Americans are far more likely to have the misfortune of growing up around violent gangs, etc.
Steven Pinker spoke about exactly this recently. There's no need to deny seemingly awkward facts in order to be a good liberal. Really, the facts show that racial inequality is still high in the USA, which supports the liberal view.
feel free to play around with interpreted languages that pen you in a coral so you don't do anything stupid and feel free to pretend that JIT really does mean it's compiled and just as fast as native code.
You were doing so well, then you confused build-model with abstraction-level.
You're right that compiled Java is reliably slower than compiled C. You're completely mistaken to imply that a JIT compiler doesn't count as a real compiler.
They are developed by compiler engineers. They use ordinary compilation and optimisation techniques (SSA form, for example) because, you know, it's a compiler.
Microsoft have implemented offline compilation for C#. Did that magically make it as fast as C? No, of course not. Similarly, Oracle are apparently working on some sort of offline compilation for Oracle Java. Will that magically make Java as fast as C? Of course not. Neither do the existing ahead-of-time Java compilers (Excelsior JET and the long-dead GCJ). It makes little difference when the compilation takes place.
Compiling C at runtime doesn't magically nullify the advantages of C, either. JIT-compiling C is standard fare with graphics shaders and OpenCL, and it's an option with CUDA. Needless to say, all three are extremely high-performance.
And I'd sure as shit trust an open community a lot more than a proprietary closed one hell-bent on protecting profits at all costs
And I'm broadly inclined to agree with you - Linux does a better job than the major commercial OS offerings, and smaller tech companies very often do an awful job handling security issues.
It's not exactly night-and-day, however. Neither Linux nor Windows are formally-verified, safety-critical OSs. They both have bugs. Same in other kinds of software: Postgres and MySQL contain bugs, and so do Oracle Database and SQL Server. I imagine it would be much the same with open hardware (if it ever exists).
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 also has spam in the start menu ('Suggested Apps'), mysterious phoning-home ('telemetry'), on-by-default web-search in the start-bar search, it deliberately makes it difficult to disable Cortana, and they're pushing UWP, the whole point of which appears to be lock people in to Microsoft's app-store that nobody asked for.
But there's Direct3D 12, which seems neat... if you can't use Vulkan.
[citation needed]
Laughably partisan 'thinking' happens on both sides of the aisle.
Trump says lots of things he doesn't really mean, like "middle class tax cut"
Indeed, of course.
Well, Trump is an unthinking, self-aggrandizing, emotionally immature moron, who applies a reality TV show attitude to his presidency. With these qualities in mind, I deem him to be a woefully inadequate president.
That it's still a matter of opinion doesn't mean I'm talking nonsense.
partisan hack
I'm British. I have no particular love for the US's Democratic party. There's a reason virtually everyone outside the US sees Trump as a laughing stock, and it's not because they're all rooting for the Democrats.
The Republican party deserves a damn sight better than Trump. Even Republicans admit this, at least the ones with integrity.
people who say "What Trump said, is really really bad!" but when they're shown that it was say Hillary or Obama who said it suddenly panic when their bubble is popped
Yup, there are plenty of unthinking partisan muppets out there, but I'm not among them.
Or when someone is given a viewpoint/statement that they agree with, and suddenly discover that it's Trump who said it.
Same again. That I think the man is incompetent doesn't mean I disagree with everything he's ever said. Indeed, I support some of his actions as president, such as withdrawing from TPP.
Anyway, if you go digging, you'll find that even Hitler and Mussolini said plenty of agreeable things. That Hitler was a dog-loving vegetarian doesn't mean we now have to avoid dogs and vegetarianism.
nothing non-objective about that
What? Of course there is. Everyone sensible holds the opinion that Trump is a bumbling buffoon, but it remains a matter of opinion.
The PS3 / 360 "last-gen" versions were essentially a beta test.
Not even close. They invested a great deal of resources in platform-specific optimisations, producing one of the best looking games ever to run on those machines, and went on to patch the game on both platforms for years.
I assume the goal is to reduce the actual offending not the reduce the caught offenders.
A sensible distinction, but there's more to it: we don't want to implement a racist system even if it's more effective at reducing offending rates.
In other words, we need to treat political correctness as an engineering goal.
Either I'm misreading you, or you're not making sense.
We're using the word 'why' to refer to the dimensions of the machine-learning data-set, right? So 'blackness' is a dimension, and is a 'why' (i.e. it's something the machine can factor into its decision to permit/deny parole).
Obviously the machine learning machine isn't going to comprehend the nuance of societal racism. That isn't the point. The point is that we're agreed we shouldn't input race data into the system.
the only thing important to factor into the prediction is if he's black.
But we just agreed that we shouldn't factor in whether the convict is black. Are you taking that back?
guise
You realise Apple didn't design the vulnerable CPUs, right?
Good work. What difference a username makes.
In addition to having the misfortune of growing up around gangs there are other factors
Yes, of course. One could do a PhD on those other factors. The 'etc' I used covers all sorts of things.
the "why" is unimportant to the "if"
But that's just it - the 'why' does matter; we're discussing deliberately discarding certain 'whys' from our estimator, in the name of not being racist.
If the reason a convict is denied parole is because he's black (i.e. were he not black then his estimated odds of re-offending would have been below the threshold), then the 'if' behind his denial surely matters.
The only thing that matters in that case if if they'll re-offend, not why they'll re-offend.
I personally don't think metrics like race should be used in the determination, but it would be more accurate if they were.
You've contradicted yourself.
If you believe that racial data should be excluded from the calculation of how likely the convict is to re-offend, that means you value something else alongside whether they'll re-offend.
That's my position, too. Discarding racial data really does diminish the accuracy of the odds-of-re-offending calculation, but we should do it anyway.
Is it really important for a potential murder victim whether the potential perpetrator is "naturally" or "culturally" violent?
What? Of course not.
Do courts accept that as a defense in a murder case?
What? Of course not.
-1 Incoherent.
What on Earth are you trying to say, AC?
60% of all homicides are suicides
most of them (about 90%) are perpetrated by yourself
Neither of which are relevant to the racial disparity question.
Looking at Wikipedia, 52% of the USA's murders (i.e. not including suicides) are committed by black murderers.
Our AC troll presumably thinks that this proves that black people are naturally violent, or some such nonsense. Nope. The USA is very far from a colour-blind society, so the figures aren't all that surprising. Black Americans are far more likely to have the misfortune of growing up around violent gangs, etc.
Steven Pinker spoke about exactly this recently. There's no need to deny seemingly awkward facts in order to be a good liberal. Really, the facts show that racial inequality is still high in the USA, which supports the liberal view.
A deployed soldier can be upwards of half a million a year in costs.
[Citation needed]
By gad you're right, it's criminal law.
Market delivers what customers are asking for.
Yeah?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
Are you under the impression this somehow undermines the other programming languages?
C is a pretty good choice of language to write an interpreter in. It's in no way hypocritical that, say, CPython is written in C.
feel free to play around with interpreted languages that pen you in a coral so you don't do anything stupid and feel free to pretend that JIT really does mean it's compiled and just as fast as native code.
You were doing so well, then you confused build-model with abstraction-level.
You're right that compiled Java is reliably slower than compiled C. You're completely mistaken to imply that a JIT compiler doesn't count as a real compiler.
They are developed by compiler engineers. They use ordinary compilation and optimisation techniques (SSA form, for example) because, you know, it's a compiler.
Microsoft have implemented offline compilation for C#. Did that magically make it as fast as C? No, of course not. Similarly, Oracle are apparently working on some sort of offline compilation for Oracle Java. Will that magically make Java as fast as C? Of course not. Neither do the existing ahead-of-time Java compilers (Excelsior JET and the long-dead GCJ). It makes little difference when the compilation takes place.
Compiling C at runtime doesn't magically nullify the advantages of C, either. JIT-compiling C is standard fare with graphics shaders and OpenCL, and it's an option with CUDA. Needless to say, all three are extremely high-performance.
C is easy if you don't try to do anything clever.
Not really. It's easy to slip and blow your leg off.
MISRA C (and, I suppose, even Ada) exist precisely because aphorisms like this don't work in practice.
Maybe in the future everything you compile gets fuzzed.
Looking for what? UB? Fuzzing is a testing technique, not a silver bullet.
Proprietary software tends to be imperfect. Proprietary hardware tends to be imperfect. Free and Open Source software tends to be imperfect.
Complete the square: what should we expect of Free and Open Source hardware?
If your answer is 'perfection', I remind you that we're discussing engineering problems, not mathematical proofs.
That is just APK (Alexander Peter Kowalski) not signing his work.
...and you are...?
Anyway: citation needed. Personally I suspect it's the tooth fairy.
And I'd sure as shit trust an open community a lot more than a proprietary closed one hell-bent on protecting profits at all costs
And I'm broadly inclined to agree with you - Linux does a better job than the major commercial OS offerings, and smaller tech companies very often do an awful job handling security issues.
It's not exactly night-and-day, however. Neither Linux nor Windows are formally-verified, safety-critical OSs. They both have bugs. Same in other kinds of software: Postgres and MySQL contain bugs, and so do Oracle Database and SQL Server. I imagine it would be much the same with open hardware (if it ever exists).
This is a question of quality, not idealism and perverse incentives.
We aren't talking about IME here. You seem to be blindly assuming that Open hardware is always free of faults.