You're right there's no obvious simple solution, but I'm still surprised Google hasn't solved it: I see no reason for it to be impossible, or beyond the expertise of Google. Well, except that there might simply not exist any better matches on the web, in which case their current results make some sense.
Nothing 'essentially' about it: ART has a full JIT compiler. It certainly doesn't mean it's as fast as Objective-C, though.
We'd expect a relatively immature JIT like ART to be nowhere near as fast as a mature JIT like HotSpot, and we'd expect it to be completely crushed by C code compiled by a mature optimising compiler like GCC. I google'd this and it seems to be the case.
(Apparently we're not meant to say Dalvik any more, even to refer to the intermediate-representation, despite that ART runs the.dex code of Dalvik.)
Well, yes they are, or they wouldn't be powering the Xbone and the PS4. Anyway, no, that ship has sailed. GPUs aren't economical for bitcoin mining any more. Dedicated circuitry is used.
So far, medical science has done essentially nothing whatsoever to stop ageing from killing us. Instead, current medicine stops us dying prematurely of other causes. I see no reason at all to think we're just going 'solve' ageing overnight, as the professor seems to think.
The entire argument seems to be something something gene editing. Not good enough.
These things tend to improve incrementally, and if we're lucky, medical science may soon take the first step in combating ageing.
You're missing my point. Israel has the power advantage. They have a first-world military. If they were set on maximising killing in Palestine, things would look nothing like what we see today.
This isn't true of Hamas, who are quite clear about the matter: they want to bring about another holocaust. The only thing holding them back is that they don't have the might to pull it off.
Imagine what would happen if the power-balance were reversed. Very different situation, and very telling as to who has the moral high-ground.
Sam Harris isn't right about everything, but his thoughts on Israel seem reasonable, and there's not much point me parotting them at length. See this talk.
The short version: the Israelis want peace. Hamas want to slaughter all the Jews. The Israelis have the military power to obliterate every last soul in Palestine... but they don't. The only thing stopping Hamas committing a massacre of Israeli Jews is that they physically can't.
I agree with most of what you've said, but let's be clear: Israel shouldn't get a free-pass for war-crimes, despite that Hamas clearly want to kill as many Jews as they possibly can. (Hamas deny the holocaust, but make it quite clear that if they could, they'd create one.)
Just because the enemy is morally depraved doesn't mean you should sweep the war-crimes of the comparative good guys, under the rug.
Also, for all Israel's crimes, it's fairly clear they aren't set on maximising needless murder. If they wanted to crush every living soul in Palestine, let's be serious: no-one would stop them. But it doesn't happen. Why? Because Israel doesn't want to do that.
The same certainly can't be said of Hamas, who would kill all Jews if they had their way (they're not exactly shy about this). But being morally superior to Hamas isn't saying much, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
we know he's good with a shotgun
Oh nonsense. We all know it's his friend who deserves all the credit for that shooting.
The broader question is whether this is how it should be.
With the law as it stands, companies aren't well motivated to prevent breaches. They lose a bit of face, but that seems to be all.
Was it discredited? Please give a link -- I couldn't find anything on my brief Googling.
Source, courtesy of the angry AC below: Why It's Scary When 0.15% Mobile Gamers Bring In 50% Of The Revenue [sic].
If you ignore derivative works, sure.
If someone wanted to make, say, an annotated version of the book, they can't do this unless it's legitimate.
By imposing a limit they keep the bulk of the casual revenue coming in while not exploiting any one individual to an extreme.
You do realise these industries depend on high-spenders that they call 'whales', right?
Free markets certainly are terrible at resisting monopolies.
This is discussed in the book The Black Swan, and doubtless countless other texts.
Ah, ok. No worries.
What on Earth are you talking about? AC and I were talking about why Google search results include copy-spam. Did you reply to the wrong comment?
You're right there's no obvious simple solution, but I'm still surprised Google hasn't solved it: I see no reason for it to be impossible, or beyond the expertise of Google. Well, except that there might simply not exist any better matches on the web, in which case their current results make some sense.
it should be expected that some people will do this
Not relevant to the questions of whether it's moral or legal.
And no McAfee crapware, either.
Devil's advocate: maybe not, if you count price.
Sure it does: I'm calling the troll a moron.
The better Slashdot trolls at least make an effort, but not this guy.
Nothing 'essentially' about it: ART has a full JIT compiler. It certainly doesn't mean it's as fast as Objective-C, though.
We'd expect a relatively immature JIT like ART to be nowhere near as fast as a mature JIT like HotSpot, and we'd expect it to be completely crushed by C code compiled by a mature optimising compiler like GCC. I google'd this and it seems to be the case.
(Apparently we're not meant to say Dalvik any more, even to refer to the intermediate-representation, despite that ART runs the .dex code of Dalvik.)
Since 1960 it's increased from around 110 to around 116. The maximum lifespan *is* increasing, but it's doing it slowly.
But we'd expect to see this happen even with a complete stall of progress in medical science, simply because population is increasing.
Think bell-curve. With a greater population, we expect the 'farthest outliers' in the population to be farther from the mean.
F
Go back to troll school. Apply yourself this time.
Android apps are free to make use of native code if/when it's appropriate, no?
Well, yes they are, or they wouldn't be powering the Xbone and the PS4. Anyway, no, that ship has sailed. GPUs aren't economical for bitcoin mining any more. Dedicated circuitry is used.
Not the first time we've seen something like this: an early version of Conficker would detect Ukrainian computers and wouldn't infect them.
Conveniently in time to enable the professor to live forever, right?
Bullshit. There's even a name for this idiocy: the Maes–Garreau law.
So far, medical science has done essentially nothing whatsoever to stop ageing from killing us. Instead, current medicine stops us dying prematurely of other causes. I see no reason at all to think we're just going 'solve' ageing overnight, as the professor seems to think.
The entire argument seems to be something something gene editing. Not good enough.
These things tend to improve incrementally, and if we're lucky, medical science may soon take the first step in combating ageing.
You're missing my point. Israel has the power advantage. They have a first-world military. If they were set on maximising killing in Palestine, things would look nothing like what we see today.
This isn't true of Hamas, who are quite clear about the matter: they want to bring about another holocaust. The only thing holding them back is that they don't have the might to pull it off.
Imagine what would happen if the power-balance were reversed. Very different situation, and very telling as to who has the moral high-ground.
No. The two sides are not moral equals.
Sam Harris isn't right about everything, but his thoughts on Israel seem reasonable, and there's not much point me parotting them at length. See this talk.
The short version: the Israelis want peace. Hamas want to slaughter all the Jews. The Israelis have the military power to obliterate every last soul in Palestine... but they don't. The only thing stopping Hamas committing a massacre of Israeli Jews is that they physically can't.
I agree with most of what you've said, but let's be clear: Israel shouldn't get a free-pass for war-crimes, despite that Hamas clearly want to kill as many Jews as they possibly can. (Hamas deny the holocaust, but make it quite clear that if they could, they'd create one.)
Just because the enemy is morally depraved doesn't mean you should sweep the war-crimes of the comparative good guys, under the rug.
I'll play devil's advocate:
Firstly, the mandatory [citation needed].
Also, for all Israel's crimes, it's fairly clear they aren't set on maximising needless murder. If they wanted to crush every living soul in Palestine, let's be serious: no-one would stop them. But it doesn't happen. Why? Because Israel doesn't want to do that.
The same certainly can't be said of Hamas, who would kill all Jews if they had their way (they're not exactly shy about this). But being morally superior to Hamas isn't saying much, of course.