With C/C++, there is the core language. Because of that modularity, each can be updated independently of the other unless the core language introduces a breaking change. Which it generally doesn't, because the people overseeing C still have the ethics required to put their target audience first before their own personal convenience.
The people overseeing C still have the required ethics. The people overseeing C++ have created std::initializer_list and the camel's nose is now inside the tent.
Stump speech, handwave, handwave, applause, mission accomplished, on to the next campaign stop.
Donald Trump has proven that American voters will believe and vote for any old bullshit, no matter how farfetched. The Democrats are late to the party (very late), but they're figuring it out.
The last thing any technologist wants to do is answer the tech support phone all day long. You get nothing but demands from the stupidest of people. Being a politician is that, all day every day. And you want us to volunteer for this, Bruce? Are you mad?
And what is a law but documentation of procedures. Do we do that? I mean I know we're supposed to, and we say we will, and we really do intend to write those header comments. Any day now. But let's get real. A brief survey of Github will show you that most code isn't commented, and half of those that are have a doxygen comment that's nothing more than repeating the name of the function with some spaces in it.
And finally, have you looked at politics in the world today? Why would anyone, nevermind a technologist, volunteer for that shit show? When the media in the country will see to it that you will be outright hated by 30% of the population the moment you open your mouth, and viewed with suspicion by another 30%, I can't imagine participating. That sort of thing really wears on a person (except for sociopaths and psychopaths, and we know how this turns out don't we...).
Any interconnected networks is an internet, not intranet. Technically, every home with a router is an internet. The major worldwide network of networks has a name: the Internet.
The flaw isn't in his original post. The flaw is in the understanding of moronic journalists who have been arguing since 2002 that Internet is a common noun, when it definitely is not. The Associated Press and The New York Times both decided to stop capitalizing the word in 2016, even when referring to the singular, properly named Internet. Oxford English Dictionary claims the common noun spelling is more common than the proper name spelling in the UK as of April 2016, while admitting the proper name is still more common in the US.
Journalists are ignorant. Two corporate campus networks linked with a bridge over a leased line is an internet but are not the Internet.
What's funny is they still use the definite article in front of the word, while completely ignoring the contradiction.
Data is why I won't vaccinate. Do some research, real deep research and look at the actual data.
I have.
Yes, improving sanitation goes a long way toward preventing plagues. The ancient Romans knew this. Medieval Europe somehow forgot it, and caused the evolution of nearly every major plague in their filthy living conditions. The cities of Medieval Europe were the real Pandora's Box, unleashing the horrors of disease on the planet that had never been seen before. No other population on Earth had as much contact with their own feces and with animal feces as Medieval Europeans did for centuries.
So the Dark Ages happened, and can't be undone. The diseases now exist. Vaccination is how we have been slowly slowly clawing our way back to the pre-Medieval state of the microscopic world. With aggressive vaccination we finally eradicated smallpox. We can't beat influenza anytime soon but we can beat rubella, mumps, and measles. And we will do it with vaccination, the same as with smallpox. Sanitation is NOT enough for all the airborne diseases. Vaccination is required.
You have data, but lack the intelligence to understand the data. You are attempting to do science, because you have formulated a hypothesis, but you are failing because you are unable to understand that your hypothesis existed long before you were born, was tested, and was found incorrect. If your hypothesis was correct, we would still have smallpox in the world today. We do not.
You will lose. You will die, if need be. We ARE going to win this.
The nightmare existence humanity suffered through for the thousand years prior to vaccination will NOT be allowed to return, and if you have to die to prevent it, I will happily pull the trigger myself. No. We are not going back to the fucking Dark Ages because of your stupid ass. The infant mortality rate was 300 in every 1000 births in Medieval Europe. That's an appalling number, and the vast majority of those deaths were from diseases that are now preventable. We are going to prevent them, if we have to ride over your corpse to do it.
Sit down and shut up you Medieval fucking peasant.
No, I'm saying there are certain people who CANNOT be vaccinated, and when herd immunity has been achieved, those people are protected because everyone else around them has been vaccinated.
This is one facet of the argument in favor of vaccination. There's considerably more to it than just that.
Vaccines aren't 100% effective for all the people who can receive them. For whatever reason their immune systems don't produce the necessary antibodies, or don't produce them in sufficient quantities, despite getting the same vaccine that's effective in most everyone else.
In addition, even a person who responded normally and produced the usual density of antibodies can still contract a disease for which they've been vaccinated if exposed to an infectious active case of the disease if their immune system is temporarily compromised, due to such things as lack of sleep or poor diet.
And finally, some normally vaccinated people with normal immune system response to the vaccination and a nominally healthy immune system will still contract the disease if exposed to an infectious active case of it. Their immune system response just gets overwhelmed. This is especially true of young children who don't have a fully mature immune system to begin with.
So there are four separate cohorts of people who are vulnerable but are being protected by herd immunity, which is preventing active infectious cases from arising at all. The difference between active cases and merely endemic exposure is considerable in a fully vaccinated population.
For once, human nature serves humanity. The teen urge to rebel against their parents is remarkably constructive in the face of the rampant stupidity of the anti-vaxxers. Now all we need is for this guy to produce a Vaccination Challenge video and stick it on Youtube and ten thousand teens will sneak behind their parents' backs to seek out a medical professional.
And now it is being called on to ascertain that certain political movements are banned?
Anti-vaxxers are not a political movement. They're a fuckwit movement. A bunch of people being willfully stupid in the same way does not constitute a political movement.
I'm sure they'll start with the wrong ones, but you'd be a fool to think they'll end there too.
Genes are basically software for living things. If you make patches to it without a good understanding how it works, it might do something completely unexpected. Of course, you can implement good software engineering practices such as iterative development, refactoring, code review and unit testing to reduce the chances of that.
That last bit is where people have an ethical problem. You can't unit test a human. You can only integration test a human. And you go through a lot of humans that way. Josef Mengele would be fine with such things. The rest of us aren't.
Rule of Intent: If action A is likely to result in outcome B, and outcome B is obtained, then carrying out action A implies the intent to obtain result B.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
In this case, as with most modern legislation that is written by the fuckers who should be the focus of the regulation instead of by a competent legislature with the public's interests at heart, it's the confluence of the two that's the problem. The malice of existing media companies acted on the stupidity of the legislature.
Moving to online texts may do nothing to resolve this part of the issue, in that no doubt there will be a similar structure to publishing them, as today Texas has inordinate power. It might even make things worse, if standardization were to go away. I don't know if its worse to have everyone using texts where religion encroaches on science, or having some people taught science and some taught religion as science.
Standardization would indeed vanish. Texas would lose its inordinate power. They have that power now because printing literally millions of physical copies of text books is too expensive to set up more than once. Digital texts, on the other hand, are infinitely malleable. It would be trivially easy to create the Intelligent Design Bullshit biology book for Texas and a normal "edition" for everyone else. The concept of editions would become little more than a version number.
Unfortunately there is no Free Software license that distinguishes between human persons and corporate legal fiction "persons". I've been wondering what it would take to modify the GPL or BSD licenses to support this distinction in a way that would be upheld by the courts. Maybe call them HGPL and HBSD, the H standing for "human".
I bet there are clauses of Creative Commons licenses that do what you want. CC BY-NC-SA looks applicable, or possibly CC BY-NC-ND.
That's all fine and dandy. But nothing in your post actually defines critical thinking. The keyword here is critical. Which is not about making up lists of arguments and explanations - anybody can do that. Its about judging the quality of those arguments. Which for most people means evaluating the source of the argument, the qualifications and trustworthiness of the people making the arguments as well as things like logical consistency (of both the argument and the people making the argument). The fact is, truth is NOT self-evident and anyone who tells you that probably doesn't want you to critically evaluate them.
99% of the time we are not experts in the topics being debated, so we are left with critical evaluations of arguments based on external factors. Understanding how and why we evaluate those factors is central to critical thinking.
While all of that is true, in this particular case, any competent carpenter can build a reasonable Foucault pendulum in their backyard. Then again, any incompetent conspiracy theorist can "explain" its behavior by claiming the flat Earth rotates, so I guess that doesn't help the true lunatics.
This particular fad is diametrically opposed to the previously existing fad of converting social media accounts of the deceased into permanent memorials, like digital gravestones.
Interestingly, more people are cremated than interred in the United States, at 50.2%, and the percentage has been creeping upward for years. Assuming the majority of cremations are voluntary rather than forced by financial necessity, it seems like these folks have found a growth business. At present, the majority of people prefer to have themselves erased rather than memorialized.
Looks like the Internet isn't going to make it easier to be a historian after all. History is more than famous people.
Slashdot Mirror
With C/C++, there is the core language. Because of that modularity, each can be updated independently of the other unless the core language introduces a breaking change. Which it generally doesn't, because the people overseeing C still have the ethics required to put their target audience first before their own personal convenience.
The people overseeing C still have the required ethics. The people overseeing C++ have created std::initializer_list and the camel's nose is now inside the tent.
And how is this to be accomplished?
Stump speech, handwave, handwave, applause, mission accomplished, on to the next campaign stop.
Donald Trump has proven that American voters will believe and vote for any old bullshit, no matter how farfetched. The Democrats are late to the party (very late), but they're figuring it out.
Including it's flawless inability to dock on its own.
It docked on its own. I watched it live.
Really, the transparent lies are kind of pathetic.
Dumping old dead code is somehow following Red Hat?
Yes. What else would you call pulseaudio?
The last thing any technologist wants to do is answer the tech support phone all day long. You get nothing but demands from the stupidest of people. Being a politician is that, all day every day. And you want us to volunteer for this, Bruce? Are you mad?
And what is a law but documentation of procedures. Do we do that? I mean I know we're supposed to, and we say we will, and we really do intend to write those header comments. Any day now. But let's get real. A brief survey of Github will show you that most code isn't commented, and half of those that are have a doxygen comment that's nothing more than repeating the name of the function with some spaces in it.
And finally, have you looked at politics in the world today? Why would anyone, nevermind a technologist, volunteer for that shit show? When the media in the country will see to it that you will be outright hated by 30% of the population the moment you open your mouth, and viewed with suspicion by another 30%, I can't imagine participating. That sort of thing really wears on a person (except for sociopaths and psychopaths, and we know how this turns out don't we...).
(This applies, no matter what gender is what. I like Apache helicopters)
Pervert.
Manufacturer of bigger sausages produces study showing that people who eat bigger sausages are less likely to be starving.
I don't get it. Could you use a car analogy?
ok buddy, what should we do first?
Why did I hear that in Liam Neeson's Good Cop voice from The LEGO Movie...? And are you going to try to strap him in front of a giant laser...
Thus showing the flaw in your original post.
Any interconnected networks is an internet, not intranet. Technically, every home with a router is an internet. The major worldwide network of networks has a name: the Internet.
The flaw isn't in his original post. The flaw is in the understanding of moronic journalists who have been arguing since 2002 that Internet is a common noun, when it definitely is not. The Associated Press and The New York Times both decided to stop capitalizing the word in 2016, even when referring to the singular, properly named Internet. Oxford English Dictionary claims the common noun spelling is more common than the proper name spelling in the UK as of April 2016, while admitting the proper name is still more common in the US.
Journalists are ignorant. Two corporate campus networks linked with a bridge over a leased line is an internet but are not the Internet.
What's funny is they still use the definite article in front of the word, while completely ignoring the contradiction.
Data is why I won't vaccinate. Do some research, real deep research and look at the actual data.
I have.
Yes, improving sanitation goes a long way toward preventing plagues. The ancient Romans knew this. Medieval Europe somehow forgot it, and caused the evolution of nearly every major plague in their filthy living conditions. The cities of Medieval Europe were the real Pandora's Box, unleashing the horrors of disease on the planet that had never been seen before. No other population on Earth had as much contact with their own feces and with animal feces as Medieval Europeans did for centuries.
So the Dark Ages happened, and can't be undone. The diseases now exist. Vaccination is how we have been slowly slowly clawing our way back to the pre-Medieval state of the microscopic world. With aggressive vaccination we finally eradicated smallpox. We can't beat influenza anytime soon but we can beat rubella, mumps, and measles. And we will do it with vaccination, the same as with smallpox. Sanitation is NOT enough for all the airborne diseases. Vaccination is required.
You have data, but lack the intelligence to understand the data. You are attempting to do science, because you have formulated a hypothesis, but you are failing because you are unable to understand that your hypothesis existed long before you were born, was tested, and was found incorrect. If your hypothesis was correct, we would still have smallpox in the world today. We do not.
Obligatory personal attack: you're a moron.
Try your force and see the counter force.
You will lose. You will die, if need be. We ARE going to win this.
The nightmare existence humanity suffered through for the thousand years prior to vaccination will NOT be allowed to return, and if you have to die to prevent it, I will happily pull the trigger myself. No. We are not going back to the fucking Dark Ages because of your stupid ass. The infant mortality rate was 300 in every 1000 births in Medieval Europe. That's an appalling number, and the vast majority of those deaths were from diseases that are now preventable. We are going to prevent them, if we have to ride over your corpse to do it.
Sit down and shut up you Medieval fucking peasant.
Testosterone causes more damage to society than measles.
Assumes facts not in evidence, but even if true, it's necessary for the propagation of the species, so we'll live with it.
No, I'm saying there are certain people who CANNOT be vaccinated, and when herd immunity has been achieved, those people are protected because everyone else around them has been vaccinated.
This is one facet of the argument in favor of vaccination. There's considerably more to it than just that.
Vaccines aren't 100% effective for all the people who can receive them. For whatever reason their immune systems don't produce the necessary antibodies, or don't produce them in sufficient quantities, despite getting the same vaccine that's effective in most everyone else.
In addition, even a person who responded normally and produced the usual density of antibodies can still contract a disease for which they've been vaccinated if exposed to an infectious active case of the disease if their immune system is temporarily compromised, due to such things as lack of sleep or poor diet.
And finally, some normally vaccinated people with normal immune system response to the vaccination and a nominally healthy immune system will still contract the disease if exposed to an infectious active case of it. Their immune system response just gets overwhelmed. This is especially true of young children who don't have a fully mature immune system to begin with.
So there are four separate cohorts of people who are vulnerable but are being protected by herd immunity, which is preventing active infectious cases from arising at all. The difference between active cases and merely endemic exposure is considerable in a fully vaccinated population.
For once, human nature serves humanity. The teen urge to rebel against their parents is remarkably constructive in the face of the rampant stupidity of the anti-vaxxers. Now all we need is for this guy to produce a Vaccination Challenge video and stick it on Youtube and ten thousand teens will sneak behind their parents' backs to seek out a medical professional.
You can't make this shit up.
I started to base all my opinions on stuff that I read on 4chan. You wouldn't believe the change in my quality of life.
But where did you manage to find a hose and a rubber chicken at this hour?
And now it is being called on to ascertain that certain political movements are banned?
Anti-vaxxers are not a political movement. They're a fuckwit movement. A bunch of people being willfully stupid in the same way does not constitute a political movement.
I'm sure they'll start with the wrong ones, but you'd be a fool to think they'll end there too.
Quite possibly.
Genes are basically software for living things. If you make patches to it without a good understanding how it works, it might do something completely unexpected. Of course, you can implement good software engineering practices such as iterative development, refactoring, code review and unit testing to reduce the chances of that.
That last bit is where people have an ethical problem. You can't unit test a human. You can only integration test a human. And you go through a lot of humans that way. Josef Mengele would be fine with such things. The rest of us aren't.
I don't want to watch the video, can anyone tell us what was so terrible about it?
Excrutiating detail.
Rule of Intent: If action A is likely to result in outcome B, and outcome B is obtained, then carrying out action A implies the intent to obtain result B.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
In this case, as with most modern legislation that is written by the fuckers who should be the focus of the regulation instead of by a competent legislature with the public's interests at heart, it's the confluence of the two that's the problem. The malice of existing media companies acted on the stupidity of the legislature.
Moving to online texts may do nothing to resolve this part of the issue, in that no doubt there will be a similar structure to publishing them, as today Texas has inordinate power. It might even make things worse, if standardization were to go away. I don't know if its worse to have everyone using texts where religion encroaches on science, or having some people taught science and some taught religion as science.
Standardization would indeed vanish. Texas would lose its inordinate power. They have that power now because printing literally millions of physical copies of text books is too expensive to set up more than once. Digital texts, on the other hand, are infinitely malleable. It would be trivially easy to create the Intelligent Design Bullshit biology book for Texas and a normal "edition" for everyone else. The concept of editions would become little more than a version number.
`apt-get install elementary-biology-1.0.1-doc`
So the nation will inevitably be swept with a wave of Generation Z kids with superpowers?
Everything I ever needed to know about radiation I learned from comic books. /s
Let me guess. Amazon?
template <int T>
struct Fibonacci
{
enum { value = Fibonacci<T - 1>::value + Fibonacci<T - 2>::value };
};
template <>
struct Fibonacci<0>
{
enum { value = 1 };
};
template <>
struct Fibonacci<1>
{
enum { value = 1 };
};
Slap that up on the white board, then walk out.
Unfortunately there is no Free Software license that distinguishes between human persons and corporate legal fiction "persons". I've been wondering what it would take to modify the GPL or BSD licenses to support this distinction in a way that would be upheld by the courts. Maybe call them HGPL and HBSD, the H standing for "human".
I bet there are clauses of Creative Commons licenses that do what you want. CC BY-NC-SA looks applicable, or possibly CC BY-NC-ND.
That's all fine and dandy. But nothing in your post actually defines critical thinking. The keyword here is critical. Which is not about making up lists of arguments and explanations - anybody can do that. Its about judging the quality of those arguments. Which for most people means evaluating the source of the argument, the qualifications and trustworthiness of the people making the arguments as well as things like logical consistency (of both the argument and the people making the argument). The fact is, truth is NOT self-evident and anyone who tells you that probably doesn't want you to critically evaluate them.
99% of the time we are not experts in the topics being debated, so we are left with critical evaluations of arguments based on external factors. Understanding how and why we evaluate those factors is central to critical thinking.
While all of that is true, in this particular case, any competent carpenter can build a reasonable Foucault pendulum in their backyard. Then again, any incompetent conspiracy theorist can "explain" its behavior by claiming the flat Earth rotates, so I guess that doesn't help the true lunatics.
This particular fad is diametrically opposed to the previously existing fad of converting social media accounts of the deceased into permanent memorials, like digital gravestones.
Interestingly, more people are cremated than interred in the United States, at 50.2%, and the percentage has been creeping upward for years. Assuming the majority of cremations are voluntary rather than forced by financial necessity, it seems like these folks have found a growth business. At present, the majority of people prefer to have themselves erased rather than memorialized.
Looks like the Internet isn't going to make it easier to be a historian after all. History is more than famous people.