And your solution is what? Less government. Yeah, that's working well in Somalia and other failed states.
It worked well here.
The whole Somalia canard is getting old and just shows how weak your thinking is. In a free society there is still government, just enough to preserve everyones liberty. We once mostly had that. We are now as far from it as Somalia is.
When things are cheaper because of greater efficiencies, everyone involved wins.
In truly free trade, everyone wins. Whenever I am better at A's than B's, and you are better at B's than A's, then trading is of benefit to both of us.
Thats regardless of any other factors. For instance, I can also be better at B's than you are at B's, yet trade still benefits both of us because no matter how much better I am then you at B's, I am still better at A's than B's.
The complaints about companies like walmart are cloud and mirrors around the idea that you may not be good enough at either A's or B's to make a reasonable living (= low wages.) But this really isn't an argument against walmart.. the problem is skills. Those attacking walmart and corporations like it won't improve anyones skills, but may end up costing people their low skill jobs.
I am sure that you are right, but I suspect that the same people who would not support redistribution only do so because they don't understand how large numbers of wealthy benefit from the way thet they and other wealthy people have stacked the decks in their favor.
..and they did that through the government.
So your solution is for even more government involvement? Yeah... you are the real problem.
I started out at Circuit City, moved to a job at Gateway, then some time at Palm, MySpace, Digg, RIM, and now Slashdot. So there. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
You seem to have destroyed over half the companies that you have worked for.
It isn't like these bulbs are chattering away - other than the occasional "I'm here" broadcast packet like once a minute or so
If you are to presume that light bulbs are to be "smart", then surely everything in the home will eventually be "smart" too. If everything each transmits one packet per minute, that turns out to be hundreds of packets per minute in total.
If I ever build my own home then this wont be much of a problem because all 4 walls of every room will have an RJ45 jack that runs to one of the front corners of the structure.
Agree, a template mess with ass backwards documentation.
The underlying problem is actually the use of templates themselves.
Outside of these monolithic libraries templates are mainly used to implement custom generics, but ultimately its a horrible way to have to do it unless you dont give a rats ass about type constraints and the eventual nearly-useless error messages that will result from not giving a rats ass about type constraints.
Essentially, to do generics well in C++ requires a mountain of boiler plate, which leads to an entirely new definition of the word 'well' that ignores the costs of effort.
For example, try to create a random number from 0 to 1.
This is almost always an error. Your poor use of terminology on this matter tells me that you've probably implemented the error.
It is nearly always the case that when you think that you need a value in the range [0.0 to 1.0], that what you more precisely need is a value in the range [0.0 to ((double) RAND_MAX / (RAND_MAX + 1))]. Otherwise any sort of binning done with this value (such as selecting a random element from an array) will have non-uniform distribution.
For the sarcasm-impaired, I am very much in favor of diesel and have been complaining for at least a decade that we don't get a good selection of diesels in the U.S.
Me too, and here is how I arrived at my opinion:
Shipping companies are in the business of, well, operating vehicles. It is not just in their best interests to reduce mileage costs, for they may not be able to be competitive in the market place if they do not. This is in contrast with how Joe Public buys vehicles, because Joe Public doesnt sacrifice their competitiveness when making sub-optimal choices. For Joe, other factors come into play such as image.
So if all these shipping companies are operating diesel vehicles instead of gasoline vehicles, then clearly diesel is more efficient than gasoline on a cost-basis in practice.
This is the heart of many of gambling's problems, especially those involving professional sports. Once someone has placed a large enough wager, it is in their best interest to try to affect the outcome, which usually involves breaking other laws and restricting others' freedom.
Down the slippery slope we go...
"Gambling should be against the law because someone might want to effect the outcome in ways that break other laws."
I have a house painting addiction. I put a new coat of paint on my house every 6 months. Unsurprisingly this turns out to be very expensive and if I continue doing it I will end up in serious financial trouble. I wish the government would make house painting illegal so that I wont turn to crime to support my house painting habit.
Statistically, a significant portion of people with a serious house painting habit turns to crime, therefore its just like gambling problems and drug problems and we should make house painting illegal.
Essentially.. "The medieval warm period was local to the north atlantic, except for all the other warm periods in the world that coincidentally were at the same time."
Certain climate researchers quietly campaigned to edit history itself, emailing colleagues (such as David Deming, University of Oklahoma) asking them to help get rid of the medieval warm period ("We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.") Deming even testified before congress about the effort.
Global warming may be a problem or it may not be. One problem is for certain, and that certain climate "researchers" are playing politics rather than science.
H2O shrinks when it goes from frozen to liquid. Thermal contraction.
Which has nothing to do with anything...
The volume of water displaced by floating ice is exactly the volume of water the ice will fill when melted.
The ice on land currently doesnt effect sea level, so here too the contraction when H2O goes from solid to liquid is meaningless.
The thermal expansion being discussed is that of liquid water as it warms.
You are proof that a little bit of knowledge is a terrible thing. You know that water contracts when it goes from solid to liquid, but you clearly have no idea what it means in practice.
I think the amazing part is that so few people mention the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), which was an American collider canceled mid-construction in the early 90's which was going to be 3 times as energetic as the LHC.
If all we get out of the LHC is "yeah, we found the Higgs Boson at about the energy that we expected it to be found", then canceling the SSC turned out to be a good move after all. The argument at the time was that we could fund more space-related stuff (ISS, etc..), or the super collider, but not both.
For many sites, there is a significant circle-jerk between the users and the advertising. The site would not exist without the advertising paying for it, AND the site also would not exist if the users werent generating content for the site. You are using an example of this right now, good old slashdot.
In those cases, if a significant number of users turn to ad blocking then eventually they cut their own throats and the site will go away. Many forums and services on the internet are these circle-jerks.
The thing about advertising is that its essentially a pay-per-view model, a model that is ultimately one of the fairest models that could be crafted. Subscription models tend to trend toward a reduction of alternatives, towards market consolidation, and the more casual a user you are the more you end up paying per view.
Anyways, if this story is indeed about a site that has ended up with 50% of its users running ad blockers then there is a pretty good chance that the particular advertising they were doing was particularly annoying (possibly lots of malware delivered too.)
The Bell results only show that there are no hidden local variables. Non-local variables could never be proved to be impossible.
For all we know all quantum events are determined by a single 128-bit LFSR.
It's the reflexive, knee-jerk anti-government types I think will be more amusing. Here we have a company (and potentially an entire industry) jump-started by a government loan, turning out to be a success, and actually repaying the loan. That sort of thing goes against all their beliefs.
Oh come off it.. Tesla was doing fine selling the Roadster prior to the government loan. The only reason Tesla got a loan at all is because the government was handing them out to all American auto-manufacturers.
The reason Tesla is succeeding is because they sell everything they make as fast as they can make them, and their profits arent just the cars that they make as they are also selling power trains through both Toyota and Daimler.
And no, the government did not have the moral authority to give a loan out to any auto-manufacturer. Its not like the loans saved Detroit.
The argument that life might begin at some point after conception is a farce because it is only ever argued against the alternative being beginning at conception. Life clearly begins before conception, unless your contention is that spermatozoa arent alive.
The horror of this insight is not in the conclusion that abortions should be banned. The horror is in the conclusion that a better test would be self awareness, and the inevitable conclusion that even 3rd trimester abortions and possibly even post-birth abortions should be considered.
In this case, they are hurting an innocent child who deserves to be brought up in a loving family, or not at all.
Nice of you to have decide that if a loving family cannot be provided, then a child deserves termination.
Do you even listen to yourself?
The debate over abortion has never been about what exactly the child deserves. Everyone rational on both sides agrees that the child deserves a chance to live in all cases, but also that the mother deserves self determination in all cases. It is that these two 'deserved' things are at odds with each other that there is any debate at all, at least among the rational people.
Way to not understand the issue at all, while you put in the effort to defend the current democrat agenda. So tell us how you feel about 3rd trimester abortions when there wont be a loving family for the child.
Especially after all these years of being excited that someday we'd eventually have a new awesome Sim City game with all that having it on modern hardware would offer (which, as it turns out, is nothing).
Judging by the civilization games, what "modern hardware" has to offer is an excuse to use horribly inefficient design methods that reduce development and maintenance costs.
What if paying for it costs you less than not paying for it?
Then there is another problem that needs to be addressed.
Step 1 - throw money at problem A.
Step 2 - observe that the cost of step 1 could be reduced by throwing money at problem B.
Step 3 - justify step 2 in quasi-isolation by telling everyone how much money it will save, without bothering to justify step 1 at all.
Step rational - realize that there is always another "problem" to throw money at, and that the correct move is to try to solve the problem instead of paving over it. The problem isn't unwanted children, and its not unwanted pregnancy either. The problem is irresponsible people making poor choices that lead to unwanted pregnancy and ultimately unwanted children.
Let me know when your step 1 punishes irresponsible acts instead of rewards them.
Do you realize that the libertarian position on gay marriage is to remove the underlying incentive to want to get married?
Did you think homosexuals want to get married because of their undying belief in the institution of marriage? Fuck no..
Homosexuals want to get married because the words 'married', 'marriage', and 'matrimony' appear 1138 times within the laws of the land passed down by our elected representatives over the years. The use of the term within the statutes most often describe special rights, benefits, and privileges given only to married people. Homosexuals want those special rights, benefits, and privileges.
Adding homosexuals to the 'special rights group' doesnt enhance liberty. Unlinking those special rights from the institution of marriage is the only way to enhance liberty.
A single eye opening example is that I can't file taxes jointly with my roommate that shares expenses with me. Homosexuals want the right to file taxes jointly, but the 'gay marriage movement' isn't up on giving everyone the right to file taxes jointly. Quite the opposite, if everyone that lived together could file taxes jointly then that would be one less reason for homosexuals to want to get married.
The gay marriage movement isnt about freedom, liberty, or equality. Its not libertarian in nature at all.
When you're working during the day, do you normally hit return, get up, go get coffee, take a piss, and come back to see the next line?
Not always, but sometimes I do.. and thats exactly where the cache will be failing me by caching stuff that I do not waiting for. I don't wait for bootup, but I do wait for visual studio.
The benefit of a larger cache removes the need to micromanage your cache, and allows for some slop, as well as for 'infrequent' data caching.
There is your problem. you think thats 8GB is a "larger cache" -- did you bother to read what you replied to?
8GB is not significantly larger than the memory size of the computer and in some systems would even be less than the memory size of the computer. Its only larger in the technical sense and only in some cases. You don't back up 8GB of memory with 8GB of cache. If you were going to do that then you are always better off getting 16GB of memory instead.
It seems like the anonymous coward crowd doesnt really understand even the basics of what we are talking about.
Slashdot Mirror
And your solution is what? Less government. Yeah, that's working well in Somalia and other failed states.
It worked well here.
The whole Somalia canard is getting old and just shows how weak your thinking is. In a free society there is still government, just enough to preserve everyones liberty. We once mostly had that. We are now as far from it as Somalia is.
That is what the tribalists dont understand.
When things are cheaper because of greater efficiencies, everyone involved wins.
In truly free trade, everyone wins. Whenever I am better at A's than B's, and you are better at B's than A's, then trading is of benefit to both of us.
Thats regardless of any other factors. For instance, I can also be better at B's than you are at B's, yet trade still benefits both of us because no matter how much better I am then you at B's, I am still better at A's than B's.
The complaints about companies like walmart are cloud and mirrors around the idea that you may not be good enough at either A's or B's to make a reasonable living (= low wages.) But this really isn't an argument against walmart.. the problem is skills. Those attacking walmart and corporations like it won't improve anyones skills, but may end up costing people their low skill jobs.
I am sure that you are right, but I suspect that the same people who would not support redistribution only do so because they don't understand how large numbers of wealthy benefit from the way thet they and other wealthy people have stacked the decks in their favor.
So your solution is for even more government involvement? Yeah... you are the real problem.
Your problem is that you think current peak throughput is the only meaningful measure.
Each device will interference with every other device. For 200 devices, there are 19900 pairs of interference. Now add in your neighbors....
I started out at Circuit City, moved to a job at Gateway, then some time at Palm, MySpace, Digg, RIM, and now Slashdot. So there. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
You seem to have destroyed over half the companies that you have worked for.
It isn't like these bulbs are chattering away - other than the occasional "I'm here" broadcast packet like once a minute or so
If you are to presume that light bulbs are to be "smart", then surely everything in the home will eventually be "smart" too. If everything each transmits one packet per minute, that turns out to be hundreds of packets per minute in total.
If I ever build my own home then this wont be much of a problem because all 4 walls of every room will have an RJ45 jack that runs to one of the front corners of the structure.
Agree, a template mess with ass backwards documentation.
The underlying problem is actually the use of templates themselves.
Outside of these monolithic libraries templates are mainly used to implement custom generics, but ultimately its a horrible way to have to do it unless you dont give a rats ass about type constraints and the eventual nearly-useless error messages that will result from not giving a rats ass about type constraints.
Essentially, to do generics well in C++ requires a mountain of boiler plate, which leads to an entirely new definition of the word 'well' that ignores the costs of effort.
For example, try to create a random number from 0 to 1.
This is almost always an error. Your poor use of terminology on this matter tells me that you've probably implemented the error.
It is nearly always the case that when you think that you need a value in the range [0.0 to 1.0], that what you more precisely need is a value in the range [0.0 to ((double) RAND_MAX / (RAND_MAX + 1))]. Otherwise any sort of binning done with this value (such as selecting a random element from an array) will have non-uniform distribution.
You will thank me some day.
For the sarcasm-impaired, I am very much in favor of diesel and have been complaining for at least a decade that we don't get a good selection of diesels in the U.S.
Me too, and here is how I arrived at my opinion:
Shipping companies are in the business of, well, operating vehicles. It is not just in their best interests to reduce mileage costs, for they may not be able to be competitive in the market place if they do not. This is in contrast with how Joe Public buys vehicles, because Joe Public doesnt sacrifice their competitiveness when making sub-optimal choices. For Joe, other factors come into play such as image.
So if all these shipping companies are operating diesel vehicles instead of gasoline vehicles, then clearly diesel is more efficient than gasoline on a cost-basis in practice.
A. Hybrid sedan - $25K, gets 44 miles per gallon.
B. Standard sedan - $13K, gets 22 miles per gallon
You've just lost by pulling figures out of your ass.
Their top of the line quad core barely keeps up against the mid range i5 chips.
For the cost of that mid-range i5, you can get an FX-8350 that will completely spank the fuck out of it.
Now stop being an irrational intel fanboy that ignores price.
This is the heart of many of gambling's problems, especially those involving professional sports. Once someone has placed a large enough wager, it is in their best interest to try to affect the outcome, which usually involves breaking other laws and restricting others' freedom.
Down the slippery slope we go...
"Gambling should be against the law because someone might want to effect the outcome in ways that break other laws."
I have a house painting addiction. I put a new coat of paint on my house every 6 months. Unsurprisingly this turns out to be very expensive and if I continue doing it I will end up in serious financial trouble. I wish the government would make house painting illegal so that I wont turn to crime to support my house painting habit.
Statistically, a significant portion of people with a serious house painting habit turns to crime, therefore its just like gambling problems and drug problems and we should make house painting illegal.
You're ignoring the fact that truly effective gun legislation (e.g. total ban on gun ownership) is a political non-starter.
Actually, it appears to be you ignoring the fact that "we must do something" is not a valid reason to do something.
I love how that wikipedia article begins...
Essentially.. "The medieval warm period was local to the north atlantic, except for all the other warm periods in the world that coincidentally were at the same time."
Certain climate researchers quietly campaigned to edit history itself, emailing colleagues (such as David Deming, University of Oklahoma) asking them to help get rid of the medieval warm period ("We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.") Deming even testified before congress about the effort.
Global warming may be a problem or it may not be. One problem is for certain, and that certain climate "researchers" are playing politics rather than science.
H2O shrinks when it goes from frozen to liquid. Thermal contraction.
Which has nothing to do with anything...
The volume of water displaced by floating ice is exactly the volume of water the ice will fill when melted.
The ice on land currently doesnt effect sea level, so here too the contraction when H2O goes from solid to liquid is meaningless.
The thermal expansion being discussed is that of liquid water as it warms.
You are proof that a little bit of knowledge is a terrible thing. You know that water contracts when it goes from solid to liquid, but you clearly have no idea what it means in practice.
I think the amazing part is that so few people mention the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), which was an American collider canceled mid-construction in the early 90's which was going to be 3 times as energetic as the LHC.
If all we get out of the LHC is "yeah, we found the Higgs Boson at about the energy that we expected it to be found", then canceling the SSC turned out to be a good move after all. The argument at the time was that we could fund more space-related stuff (ISS, etc..), or the super collider, but not both.
This is the way I am looking at it:
For many sites, there is a significant circle-jerk between the users and the advertising. The site would not exist without the advertising paying for it, AND the site also would not exist if the users werent generating content for the site. You are using an example of this right now, good old slashdot.
In those cases, if a significant number of users turn to ad blocking then eventually they cut their own throats and the site will go away. Many forums and services on the internet are these circle-jerks.
The thing about advertising is that its essentially a pay-per-view model, a model that is ultimately one of the fairest models that could be crafted. Subscription models tend to trend toward a reduction of alternatives, towards market consolidation, and the more casual a user you are the more you end up paying per view.
Anyways, if this story is indeed about a site that has ended up with 50% of its users running ad blockers then there is a pretty good chance that the particular advertising they were doing was particularly annoying (possibly lots of malware delivered too.)
The key there is 'from our viewpoint'
The Bell results only show that there are no hidden local variables. Non-local variables could never be proved to be impossible.
For all we know all quantum events are determined by a single 128-bit LFSR.
It's the reflexive, knee-jerk anti-government types I think will be more amusing. Here we have a company (and potentially an entire industry) jump-started by a government loan, turning out to be a success, and actually repaying the loan. That sort of thing goes against all their beliefs.
Oh come off it.. Tesla was doing fine selling the Roadster prior to the government loan. The only reason Tesla got a loan at all is because the government was handing them out to all American auto-manufacturers.
The reason Tesla is succeeding is because they sell everything they make as fast as they can make them, and their profits arent just the cars that they make as they are also selling power trains through both Toyota and Daimler.
And no, the government did not have the moral authority to give a loan out to any auto-manufacturer. Its not like the loans saved Detroit.
Science can *not* tell you when life begins.
The argument that life might begin at some point after conception is a farce because it is only ever argued against the alternative being beginning at conception. Life clearly begins before conception, unless your contention is that spermatozoa arent alive.
The horror of this insight is not in the conclusion that abortions should be banned. The horror is in the conclusion that a better test would be self awareness, and the inevitable conclusion that even 3rd trimester abortions and possibly even post-birth abortions should be considered.
In this case, they are hurting an innocent child who deserves to be brought up in a loving family, or not at all.
Nice of you to have decide that if a loving family cannot be provided, then a child deserves termination.
Do you even listen to yourself?
The debate over abortion has never been about what exactly the child deserves. Everyone rational on both sides agrees that the child deserves a chance to live in all cases, but also that the mother deserves self determination in all cases. It is that these two 'deserved' things are at odds with each other that there is any debate at all, at least among the rational people.
Way to not understand the issue at all, while you put in the effort to defend the current democrat agenda. So tell us how you feel about 3rd trimester abortions when there wont be a loving family for the child.
Especially after all these years of being excited that someday we'd eventually have a new awesome Sim City game with all that having it on modern hardware would offer (which, as it turns out, is nothing).
Judging by the civilization games, what "modern hardware" has to offer is an excuse to use horribly inefficient design methods that reduce development and maintenance costs.
What if paying for it costs you less than not paying for it?
Then there is another problem that needs to be addressed.
Step 1 - throw money at problem A.
Step 2 - observe that the cost of step 1 could be reduced by throwing money at problem B.
Step 3 - justify step 2 in quasi-isolation by telling everyone how much money it will save, without bothering to justify step 1 at all.
Step rational - realize that there is always another "problem" to throw money at, and that the correct move is to try to solve the problem instead of paving over it. The problem isn't unwanted children, and its not unwanted pregnancy either. The problem is irresponsible people making poor choices that lead to unwanted pregnancy and ultimately unwanted children.
Let me know when your step 1 punishes irresponsible acts instead of rewards them.
Do you realize that the libertarian position on gay marriage is to remove the underlying incentive to want to get married?
Did you think homosexuals want to get married because of their undying belief in the institution of marriage? Fuck no..
Homosexuals want to get married because the words 'married', 'marriage', and 'matrimony' appear 1138 times within the laws of the land passed down by our elected representatives over the years. The use of the term within the statutes most often describe special rights, benefits, and privileges given only to married people. Homosexuals want those special rights, benefits, and privileges.
Adding homosexuals to the 'special rights group' doesnt enhance liberty. Unlinking those special rights from the institution of marriage is the only way to enhance liberty.
A single eye opening example is that I can't file taxes jointly with my roommate that shares expenses with me. Homosexuals want the right to file taxes jointly, but the 'gay marriage movement' isn't up on giving everyone the right to file taxes jointly. Quite the opposite, if everyone that lived together could file taxes jointly then that would be one less reason for homosexuals to want to get married.
The gay marriage movement isnt about freedom, liberty, or equality. Its not libertarian in nature at all.
When you're working during the day, do you normally hit return, get up, go get coffee, take a piss, and come back to see the next line?
Not always, but sometimes I do.. and thats exactly where the cache will be failing me by caching stuff that I do not waiting for. I don't wait for bootup, but I do wait for visual studio.
The benefit of a larger cache removes the need to micromanage your cache, and allows for some slop, as well as for 'infrequent' data caching.
There is your problem. you think thats 8GB is a "larger cache" -- did you bother to read what you replied to?
8GB is not significantly larger than the memory size of the computer and in some systems would even be less than the memory size of the computer. Its only larger in the technical sense and only in some cases. You don't back up 8GB of memory with 8GB of cache. If you were going to do that then you are always better off getting 16GB of memory instead.
It seems like the anonymous coward crowd doesnt really understand even the basics of what we are talking about.