All "analog" formats are quantized at some level. Smooth "analog" levels are just an illusion caused when the fundamentally quantum nature of reality is fine-grained. However, some recording formats are getting down to the point where there's no "analog layer. When you can count the electrons involved in a bit stored on magnetic media, or memory circuit, then it's "digital" all the way down.
Similarly, we're getting to transistors that are just dozens of atoms across, "Quantum crypto" that just fiber optics that send individual photons, and so on. At that scale, the illusions of "analog" is pierced and again it's all "digital".
You'd be wrong. Chinese civil wars eclipse everything else on Earth if you add them up, if you're just looking at wars - it's at least 200 million. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
By far the most death has come from disease inadvertently spread. Around 90% of the population of central America, and 95% of North America, died from diseases spread by early explorers. No, that wasn't don on purpose (though there were relatively small incidents centuries later).
Not as high percentage-wise, but higher in absolute numbers, was the migration of the Black Death from China across Europe, mostly thanks to the Mongols.
Plenty of powerful empires throughout history had nothing to do with "blame Whitey".
The entire point of the 5th Amendment is that the government cannot compel action from you needed to incriminate yourself. That right should, indeed, be absolute without exception always and forever.
A warrant means the 4th Amendment is satisfied. The government can do what they like with that piece of paper
xceptions must always be possible in any reasonable system
BS. A reasonable system protects me from the government absolutely, requiring the government to work around that as best they can. There's no "except" in the Bill of Rights, aside from the warrant exception in the 4th. We keep punching unconstitutional holes in it because we're scared, or, rather, because tyrants leverage the fear of the people to incrementally strip their rights. You're helping them do that. Right now. You should be ashamed.
It's not about the infrastructure vanishing, never to return. It's about the infrastructure vanishing, and not coming back for days, even a couple of weeks.
If you live where hurricanes are common, you already deal wit this - but there are warnings ahead of time. If you live where heavy snow can take everything down, you already deal with this. If you're Mormon (and observant), you're already ahead of the game with 1 month's supplies.
Given the vulnerability of the grid, it's time for everyone to come up to speed on this. Be ready for at least a week without utilities: some bottled water, some way to purify water, some foodstock that doesn't require refrigeration, or cooking (unless you have a fireplace/wood stove and have that all planned out). Basically, 2 weeks of camping supplies, heavy on the water.
One other thing to look at is shared memory as a "transport". I did very fast IPC between C# and some kernel-mde C code (initiated from the C# side) once - yeah, still some serialization, since you can't use raw pointers, but not a lot.
Sure, that was about what I was saying - your option is to switch vendors - to a different asshole who will lock you down to some other bullshit. You have to go pretty far out of the mainstream to reclaim choice.
The law doesn't specify an amount, it specifies that you pay at least average. Infosys is one of the cheaters, perhaps the most famous. They just ignore the law, have from the start, and will keep ignoring it unless the government actually bothers with enforcement. Thus far there have been enough campaign contributions to keep that from happening.
That's a bit more code than a traditional Unix init system...
That's a bit more code than an old-school Unix system.
EMACS and systemd are both credible complete operating systems, but EMACS is lighter weight, includes a web browser, and can emit textual log files. It's a clear victory for EMACS.
It's not news to hear them take down trivial targets, let's hear it when they actually take down bigger fish
Taking down easy targets is what the beginning of taking down hard targets looks like. Enforcing H1-B laws at all is rare enough that even the small fry are newsworthy. Lets hope there's some actual follow-through.
The H1-B laws as written are pretty good: you have to pay at least average, and you must have at least tried to hire a US citizen. We all know companies that cheat on this, but I've worked for plenty that don't cheat. It's easy to know the cheaters, because all, or nearly all, low-level employees are H1-Bs.
Companies just trying to fill reqs with qualified people will have a real mix of citizens, green cards, and various visas. That's what it looks like when you're desperate to hire, and you'll find a way to hire anyone who gets through your interviews: a diverse mess of immigration statuses. And, importantly, they're all employees, not any outsourcing going on.
OTOH, if you're a body-shop outsourcing company that just competes on price, it's almost all H1-Bs (except some management), no one on green card track, everyone underpaid, so damn easy to see what's happening there. If only the federal government gave a fuck.
Have you tried Managed C++? I've been through this 3 times now, and each time the team didn't believe me until we did the experiment. There's a quite nice boost in performance when your C++ code can, e.g., iterate through a list of strings as input without any copying or marshaling.
More complex classes require conversion or some tedious hand-coded wrappers, but we did a lot with just library containers, and the ability to just use C# objects directly from normal C++ code that knows nothing of.NET (thanks to some wrappers) is quite nice.
I also do this all the time between my C# (tools) code and C++ (game engine) code, and I've never found it constraining, although it's certainly tedious to recreate all the APIs in C. Creating a C-style interface for just about any C++ objects is reasonably straightforward if you break it down into handle (address of object) + method
The awkwardness depends a lot on whether your C++ style is "never (need to) explicitly clean up anything ever" code, or "C code with classes". If you're still doing the latter, catching exceptions and returning status codes, explicit clean-up code at the bottom of functions, or in destructors, that sort of thing, then it's not a big deal to make C-style wrappers.
OTOH, if you're using scoped objects and not in the habit of explicit clean-up, then it gets really awkward when you start doing stuff like: OK, I need to return an array. I can't return a pointer to my vector, since no shared pointers, so I'll have to copy it into a C-style array. Who's going to free that? Well, obviously, the caller should allocate it, and free it when appropriate, but how does the caller know how big to allocate? OK, I need another API function to just get the size, which is going to have to do all the same work. And so on and so on. All solvable, but you end up with a lot of copies being made, and a minefield for either leaks or dangling pointers if you don't completely understand how long the managed code is going to use that pointer you gave it.
So much easier for the C++ code to just take a reference to a vector as input, and never even realize it built a CLR List instead of a std::vector as it went (or, worst case, return a shared pointer to a vector, and copy it into a CLR list - less efficient, but no leaks or dangling pointers possible).
As the sibling post says: Ubuntu blows goats. Ubuntu nags me constantly to reboot, far more than MS's traditional once-a-month. With Win10, MS finally catches up to Ubuntu's almost-weekly reboots.
(Of course, you can just ignore the Ubuntu nagging, unless your company has a policy requiring you to reboot when nagged.)
C++ just requires a thin C layer around the object oriented calls
Ah, yes, the "thin layer" that means you don't work directly with STL vectors, strings and maps, and, well, objects. Also, no exceptions. Bridging between an OOP language and an OOP language via C code means you need two awkward transitions between C-style code and OOP code.
I've done that far to many times. It can be quite constraining for your C++ code, depending on what kind of problem you're trying to solve. Also, that kind of marshaling is expensive. I've worked on plenty of Java codebases where 90% of CPU time was various serialization and deserialization code.
Well, better than nothing, but JNI was really intended to allow small chunks of C code to either do a bit of expensive calculation, or be a custom driver, or just wrap a system call that Java didn't, but in any case be a synchronous part of a Java function call. Much like C# with it's built-in marshaller, which punishes you for doing anything beyond wrapping system calls that the.NET runtime doesn't.
This is about "ahead of time" compilation, otherwise known as "compilation", which third-party tools have done forever. Linking to C in Java is its own world, and I don't know how practical C++ is.
It's dead easy to bridge between C++ and C# at runtime using Managed C++ (or whatever they call it these days). The C# marshaller, the built-in way to get C objects from C# code, is slow painful garbage that no one should use, but it's easy to do the conversion in C++ and either object conversion or using objects directly is very fast that way.
You can compile C# to a proper EXE or DLLs easily enough and it will happily load C/C++ DLLs. The reverse is a bitch though - I've heard it's possible (the.NET runtime is also just DLLs), but I never got it to work properly.
You can (awkwardly) run C code from Java, including loading DLLs, but I've never heard it's possible to do the reverse. What can C code do with a JAR?
Linking all three would be a bragworthy project, but I think Java is just missing the key concept here.
He uses Aspect Oriented Programming, so code is impossible to read and thus he doesn't practice reading comprehension much. (Also, Kirk could kick Picard's ass, and EMACS > VI).
You're wrong about Aspirin, BTW. Bayer lost the rights to that trademark (along with heroin) because they made chemical weapons for the Germans in WWI.
Battery cases are a bit niche, but external battery packs are ubiquitous, as are protective cases that make phones bulkier. I actually did buy a case to make my phone thinner - thinner than the phone with my previous case.
Fashion companies don't make things that are useful or good. They make arbitrary shit, then make it popular, and people rush to buy the inferior, but fashionable, product, and pay a lot more for the privilege.
It's not like you can even blame Apple for taking advantage of this, really. But it's not about "market research", it's about "setting the trend". Telling, not asking, people what they want.
Slashdot Mirror
All "analog" formats are quantized at some level. Smooth "analog" levels are just an illusion caused when the fundamentally quantum nature of reality is fine-grained. However, some recording formats are getting down to the point where there's no "analog layer. When you can count the electrons involved in a bit stored on magnetic media, or memory circuit, then it's "digital" all the way down.
Similarly, we're getting to transistors that are just dozens of atoms across, "Quantum crypto" that just fiber optics that send individual photons, and so on. At that scale, the illusions of "analog" is pierced and again it's all "digital".
You'd be wrong. Chinese civil wars eclipse everything else on Earth if you add them up, if you're just looking at wars - it's at least 200 million. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
By far the most death has come from disease inadvertently spread. Around 90% of the population of central America, and 95% of North America, died from diseases spread by early explorers. No, that wasn't don on purpose (though there were relatively small incidents centuries later).
Not as high percentage-wise, but higher in absolute numbers, was the migration of the Black Death from China across Europe, mostly thanks to the Mongols.
Plenty of powerful empires throughout history had nothing to do with "blame Whitey".
The entire point of the 5th Amendment is that the government cannot compel action from you needed to incriminate yourself. That right should, indeed, be absolute without exception always and forever.
A warrant means the 4th Amendment is satisfied. The government can do what they like with that piece of paper
xceptions must always be possible in any reasonable system
BS. A reasonable system protects me from the government absolutely, requiring the government to work around that as best they can. There's no "except" in the Bill of Rights, aside from the warrant exception in the 4th. We keep punching unconstitutional holes in it because we're scared, or, rather, because tyrants leverage the fear of the people to incrementally strip their rights. You're helping them do that. Right now. You should be ashamed.
It's not about the infrastructure vanishing, never to return. It's about the infrastructure vanishing, and not coming back for days, even a couple of weeks.
If you live where hurricanes are common, you already deal wit this - but there are warnings ahead of time. If you live where heavy snow can take everything down, you already deal with this. If you're Mormon (and observant), you're already ahead of the game with 1 month's supplies.
Given the vulnerability of the grid, it's time for everyone to come up to speed on this. Be ready for at least a week without utilities: some bottled water, some way to purify water, some foodstock that doesn't require refrigeration, or cooking (unless you have a fireplace/wood stove and have that all planned out). Basically, 2 weeks of camping supplies, heavy on the water.
Are you being an academic purist insisting nothing but Smalltalk is real OOP? Otherwise I don't get your point,
One other thing to look at is shared memory as a "transport". I did very fast IPC between C# and some kernel-mde C code (initiated from the C# side) once - yeah, still some serialization, since you can't use raw pointers, but not a lot.
Sure, that was about what I was saying - your option is to switch vendors - to a different asshole who will lock you down to some other bullshit. You have to go pretty far out of the mainstream to reclaim choice.
You keep ignoring the difference between "banning everyone", and "only allowing those who pay a fee". Why is that?
The law doesn't specify an amount, it specifies that you pay at least average. Infosys is one of the cheaters, perhaps the most famous. They just ignore the law, have from the start, and will keep ignoring it unless the government actually bothers with enforcement. Thus far there have been enough campaign contributions to keep that from happening.
This thread is about companies that abuse their users by removing their choices.
That's a bit more code than a traditional Unix init system...
That's a bit more code than an old-school Unix system.
EMACS and systemd are both credible complete operating systems, but EMACS is lighter weight, includes a web browser, and can emit textual log files. It's a clear victory for EMACS.
inflammable = flammable. It's one of those unfortunate english words.
"In-" can mean both "not-" for latin root words, or "overly-" for other words like infamous or ingenious.
Here that's a coincidence, as the root verb is "inflame".
You simply don't know what an English word means until you know its etymology. Hey, at least you don't need to know its Kanji.
It's not news to hear them take down trivial targets, let's hear it when they actually take down bigger fish
Taking down easy targets is what the beginning of taking down hard targets looks like. Enforcing H1-B laws at all is rare enough that even the small fry are newsworthy. Lets hope there's some actual follow-through.
The H1-B laws as written are pretty good: you have to pay at least average, and you must have at least tried to hire a US citizen. We all know companies that cheat on this, but I've worked for plenty that don't cheat. It's easy to know the cheaters, because all, or nearly all, low-level employees are H1-Bs.
Companies just trying to fill reqs with qualified people will have a real mix of citizens, green cards, and various visas. That's what it looks like when you're desperate to hire, and you'll find a way to hire anyone who gets through your interviews: a diverse mess of immigration statuses. And, importantly, they're all employees, not any outsourcing going on.
OTOH, if you're a body-shop outsourcing company that just competes on price, it's almost all H1-Bs (except some management), no one on green card track, everyone underpaid, so damn easy to see what's happening there. If only the federal government gave a fuck.
Have you tried Managed C++? I've been through this 3 times now, and each time the team didn't believe me until we did the experiment. There's a quite nice boost in performance when your C++ code can, e.g., iterate through a list of strings as input without any copying or marshaling.
More complex classes require conversion or some tedious hand-coded wrappers, but we did a lot with just library containers, and the ability to just use C# objects directly from normal C++ code that knows nothing of .NET (thanks to some wrappers) is quite nice.
I also do this all the time between my C# (tools) code and C++ (game engine) code, and I've never found it constraining, although it's certainly tedious to recreate all the APIs in C. Creating a C-style interface for just about any C++ objects is reasonably straightforward if you break it down into handle (address of object) + method
The awkwardness depends a lot on whether your C++ style is "never (need to) explicitly clean up anything ever" code, or "C code with classes". If you're still doing the latter, catching exceptions and returning status codes, explicit clean-up code at the bottom of functions, or in destructors, that sort of thing, then it's not a big deal to make C-style wrappers.
OTOH, if you're using scoped objects and not in the habit of explicit clean-up, then it gets really awkward when you start doing stuff like: OK, I need to return an array. I can't return a pointer to my vector, since no shared pointers, so I'll have to copy it into a C-style array. Who's going to free that? Well, obviously, the caller should allocate it, and free it when appropriate, but how does the caller know how big to allocate? OK, I need another API function to just get the size, which is going to have to do all the same work. And so on and so on. All solvable, but you end up with a lot of copies being made, and a minefield for either leaks or dangling pointers if you don't completely understand how long the managed code is going to use that pointer you gave it.
So much easier for the C++ code to just take a reference to a vector as input, and never even realize it built a CLR List instead of a std::vector as it went (or, worst case, return a shared pointer to a vector, and copy it into a CLR list - less efficient, but no leaks or dangling pointers possible).
As the sibling post says: Ubuntu blows goats. Ubuntu nags me constantly to reboot, far more than MS's traditional once-a-month. With Win10, MS finally catches up to Ubuntu's almost-weekly reboots.
(Of course, you can just ignore the Ubuntu nagging, unless your company has a policy requiring you to reboot when nagged.)
Except that, Apple has rolled out OPTIONAL updates for the past 10+ years
Tell me more about the OPTIONAL headphone jack.
C++ just requires a thin C layer around the object oriented calls
Ah, yes, the "thin layer" that means you don't work directly with STL vectors, strings and maps, and, well, objects. Also, no exceptions. Bridging between an OOP language and an OOP language via C code means you need two awkward transitions between C-style code and OOP code.
I've done that far to many times. It can be quite constraining for your C++ code, depending on what kind of problem you're trying to solve. Also, that kind of marshaling is expensive. I've worked on plenty of Java codebases where 90% of CPU time was various serialization and deserialization code.
Well, better than nothing, but JNI was really intended to allow small chunks of C code to either do a bit of expensive calculation, or be a custom driver, or just wrap a system call that Java didn't, but in any case be a synchronous part of a Java function call. Much like C# with it's built-in marshaller, which punishes you for doing anything beyond wrapping system calls that the .NET runtime doesn't.
This is about "ahead of time" compilation, otherwise known as "compilation", which third-party tools have done forever. Linking to C in Java is its own world, and I don't know how practical C++ is.
It's dead easy to bridge between C++ and C# at runtime using Managed C++ (or whatever they call it these days). The C# marshaller, the built-in way to get C objects from C# code, is slow painful garbage that no one should use, but it's easy to do the conversion in C++ and either object conversion or using objects directly is very fast that way.
You can compile C# to a proper EXE or DLLs easily enough and it will happily load C/C++ DLLs. The reverse is a bitch though - I've heard it's possible (the .NET runtime is also just DLLs), but I never got it to work properly.
You can (awkwardly) run C code from Java, including loading DLLs, but I've never heard it's possible to do the reverse. What can C code do with a JAR?
Linking all three would be a bragworthy project, but I think Java is just missing the key concept here.
Reading comprehension skills, do you have them?
He uses Aspect Oriented Programming, so code is impossible to read and thus he doesn't practice reading comprehension much. (Also, Kirk could kick Picard's ass, and EMACS > VI).
You're wrong about Aspirin, BTW. Bayer lost the rights to that trademark (along with heroin) because they made chemical weapons for the Germans in WWI.
Battery cases are a bit niche, but external battery packs are ubiquitous, as are protective cases that make phones bulkier. I actually did buy a case to make my phone thinner - thinner than the phone with my previous case.
Fashion companies don't make things that are useful or good. They make arbitrary shit, then make it popular, and people rush to buy the inferior, but fashionable, product, and pay a lot more for the privilege.
It's not like you can even blame Apple for taking advantage of this, really. But it's not about "market research", it's about "setting the trend". Telling, not asking, people what they want.
Wow, I'd have to say in that case that justice was served! Would public floggings for all Beiber fans be overkill?
forceful penetration is the standard for rape. Women cant break that law,
Wow, you really abstain from internet porn, don't you? I have to say I admire your restraint.
The contrast is stark, isn't it? "People with real problems putting their lives at risk" vs "I was microagressed, where is my safe space?"
That contrast is why so much derision is heaped upon "SJW"s, and Keyboard Warriors of all stripes.