The quote in the article is from a "Tesla employee", without qualification as "former Tesla employee" as used elsewhere in the article. Also, I'd take a report from the people doing the firing that it was merit-based and not a cost-cutting measure with a grain of salt as well.
Of course, it's all highly speculative at this point and in some sense I don't even see how it really matters, apart from as an indicator of Tesla's short-term economics.
"For the SJWs never forget the KKK and also SJWs and a prime example of what you will become, not only to gain power but just like them, when you are finally rejected into oblivion and that means you ANTIFA left my ass, you are self serving far right idiots pretending to be from the left."
i really don't understand the point of this exercise. for most bread-and-butter programming tasks, you can get most or all of the benefit of a (still hypothetical, mind) quantum co-processor with just one function, let's call it quantum_fourier_transform(). just with that, and a few classical reductions which Smart People will probably pre-wrap for you, you can run Shor's algorithm and all that sexy number theory.
apart from that, there's what? full-blown quantum system simulation (can't really imagine physics grad students needing to use Visual Studio, but even if so, it's pretty niche), some adiabatic optimization methods (for which, as with QFT, 99% of the benefit can just be black-boxed), Grover's algorithm (not clear if this would even be useful in practice, but could be mostly black-boxed anyway). am i missing something? i haven't looked at QC deeply since the 1990s, but it also doesn't look like anything really new has been done on the algorithms side. people are just waiting (and waiting, and waiting) for the first real scalable quantum computer hardware.
i'm just skeptical that programmers who are, by and large, baffled by first-order differential equations, will really need to program a QC directly. and the ones who could probably don't need whatever tinker-toy wrapper Microsoft is going to throw around it. maybe i'm being myopic, but i don't see what problem Microsoft is solving; then again, all they need to do is convince a handful of government bureaucrats to give them a boatload of patents, and it's free money for at least 17 years.
well, you see, CEOs are paid so much money for the singular and unique value they offer to a company faced with challenges only few have ever surmounted. it is necessary to pay a large salary because the rewards he can bring are so large that there is a lot of competition. and apparently even more money if he fucks it up, because hey he deserves it.
that last part is sorta weird, but as long as you don't ever think it even remotely applies to you, you'll be fine, pleb.
yeah, although i will accept his narrow nitpicking point about my claim, this autistic prick is missing the forest for the trees.
the ISPs, by and large, lobbied to have the definition of "internet" changed to include preferential peering, traffic shaping, and literally every hypothetically possible trick imaginable, and yet they want to advertise "internet speed" in the most advantageous way (to them) possible. nope. if "internet" now includes gaming the shit out of connection metrics, then the private network speed is not the same thing as internet speed, and the advertising is fraudulent.
i understand that they would want a known source. i even acknowledge that my comment is almost off-topic, because hopefully the self-regulatory body of mobile providers would not green-light blatantly compromised speed tests for one provider.
however, your argument by hypothetical contradiction aside, yes, i will give more credence to the speedtest which reflects the poor performance i observe in practice rather than the suspiciously specific speedtest my provider tells me to use, especially in light of all the other bullshit my de facto monopoly cable provider does.
anecdotally, i have a great experience with t-mobile while in nyc (even better than my friends with verizon or at&t), but it absolutely degrades to shit when i'm in the middle of nowhere.
statistically, i can't offer a thorough analysis. however, it's worth noting that i can cover 99.77% of the population of the entire United States while covering only 84% of its area. it is quite simple: omit Alaska entirely. similarly, i can cover 90% of the population while covering 51% of area by picking the top 25 most densely-populated states.
hopefully this will at least suggest that games can be played by cherry-picking major metropolitan areas, even more easily than picking states. data is available here based on 2013 census: https://pastebin.com/nDsVCK9U
when i called my cable company to complain about the speed of my home internet service (after stuttering on youtube prompting me to do a speed test), they told me that they would only accept a complaint like that if it came from a specific speed testing service, and to try it again with that one. what a surprise that this speed test registered my connection as being ~10x faster.
i already said it was a hypothetical; you don't need to be such a condescending dick. i've been around to hear enough discussions along the lines of "i'll talk to my friend at Google/Microsoft/Mozilla and see about getting that implemented", that the possibility of some weird collusion isn't completely crazy.
nonetheless, i agree with you that it's a far-fetched possibility given the information, and that Occam's Razor would imply that Mozilla is simply exhibiting their own organizational inability.
"I honestly don't know what is the matter with some people online, labelling themselves as software developers but being scared of code! Not even understanding a simple algorithm! And reacting aggressively with anyone on account of their own lacks! Constantly lying and thinking that everyone lies to them?!"
methinks he doth protest too much.
seriously, you're out of your fucking league on this one and really don't know what you're talking about. fwiw, it's out of my league too, but i'm at least smart and educated enough to understand what the problem is asking.
and, yes, the downstream "real-world" implications for submitting something worthy of the prize would be incredible. with an efficient solution to N-Queens (essentially a permutation search), you could make everyday cloud-computing hundreds of times more efficient just by automatically optimizing job schedules and processor concurrency. hell, with just a little bit of savvy, you could replace Amazon as the de facto standard compute provider and still have them begging to use your tech for warehouse optimization.
I do wonder about this sometimes. Hypothetically, suppose that Google and, say, Facebook make a Devil's Alliance to propose, on an ongoing basis, backward-incompatible de-facto browser extensions and technical requirements for plugins, etc., all in the name of worthwhile causes such as security, an open web, ease of interoperability, streaming, payment, etc., but at such a breakneck pace with convoluted requirements that it's all but impossible for a company without 10,000+ employees to keep up. If the "web at large" (which, make no mistake, mostly goes along with the diktat of major players like Google and Facebook who literally hold the purse strings of advertisers) demands innovation at a pace where the "open alternative" can't keep up, then the open alternative dies from seemingly-natural causes.
Capitalism is defined as an economic system in which capital controls the means of production. How is this not capitalism?
i'm pretty sure that's wrong, because it didn't include "Jesus" or "freedom". also your phrasing practically invites criticism, which is itself tantamount to being a Marxist, and since you're a communist you must be wrong. qed.
"a check of his method, applied to the works of James Joyce, gave the result that Ulysses, Joyce's multi-perspective, multi-style masterpiece, was written by five separate individuals; none of whom had any part in the crafting of Joyce's first novel."
idk, that's the sort of corner case where a failure actually increases credibility. it would be downright suspicious if it identified Joyce distinctly.:)
eh, just restrict yourself to Simplified Technical English or basic English when writing your manifesto, and be sure to randomize both sentence length and word choices.
Slashdot Mirror
The quote in the article is from a "Tesla employee", without qualification as "former Tesla employee" as used elsewhere in the article. Also, I'd take a report from the people doing the firing that it was merit-based and not a cost-cutting measure with a grain of salt as well.
Of course, it's all highly speculative at this point and in some sense I don't even see how it really matters, apart from as an indicator of Tesla's short-term economics.
"They might as well just drive around in gold-plated police cars."
pretty sure they already do, which is why they needed something even more ridiculous to top it.
it's Dubai; you meant "halal".
"For the SJWs never forget the KKK and also SJWs and a prime example of what you will become, not only to gain power but just like them, when you are finally rejected into oblivion and that means you ANTIFA left my ass, you are self serving far right idiots pretending to be from the left."
time for your meds, grandpa.
i really don't understand the point of this exercise. for most bread-and-butter programming tasks, you can get most or all of the benefit of a (still hypothetical, mind) quantum co-processor with just one function, let's call it quantum_fourier_transform(). just with that, and a few classical reductions which Smart People will probably pre-wrap for you, you can run Shor's algorithm and all that sexy number theory.
apart from that, there's what? full-blown quantum system simulation (can't really imagine physics grad students needing to use Visual Studio, but even if so, it's pretty niche), some adiabatic optimization methods (for which, as with QFT, 99% of the benefit can just be black-boxed), Grover's algorithm (not clear if this would even be useful in practice, but could be mostly black-boxed anyway). am i missing something? i haven't looked at QC deeply since the 1990s, but it also doesn't look like anything really new has been done on the algorithms side. people are just waiting (and waiting, and waiting) for the first real scalable quantum computer hardware.
i'm just skeptical that programmers who are, by and large, baffled by first-order differential equations, will really need to program a QC directly. and the ones who could probably don't need whatever tinker-toy wrapper Microsoft is going to throw around it. maybe i'm being myopic, but i don't see what problem Microsoft is solving; then again, all they need to do is convince a handful of government bureaucrats to give them a boatload of patents, and it's free money for at least 17 years.
hahahahaha, no.
kill yourself.
maybe the meddlesome do-gooders will kill themselves and leave room for the rational people.
they're probably jews too.
what the fuck are you talking about?
well, you see, CEOs are paid so much money for the singular and unique value they offer to a company faced with challenges only few have ever surmounted. it is necessary to pay a large salary because the rewards he can bring are so large that there is a lot of competition. and apparently even more money if he fucks it up, because hey he deserves it.
that last part is sorta weird, but as long as you don't ever think it even remotely applies to you, you'll be fine, pleb.
To quote Thomas Jefferson, "The Tree of Bare Fucking Minimum Standards of Responsibility and Decorum must be refreshed from time to time with blood."
i try. believe me, i try.
yeah, although i will accept his narrow nitpicking point about my claim, this autistic prick is missing the forest for the trees.
the ISPs, by and large, lobbied to have the definition of "internet" changed to include preferential peering, traffic shaping, and literally every hypothetically possible trick imaginable, and yet they want to advertise "internet speed" in the most advantageous way (to them) possible. nope. if "internet" now includes gaming the shit out of connection metrics, then the private network speed is not the same thing as internet speed, and the advertising is fraudulent.
i understand that they would want a known source. i even acknowledge that my comment is almost off-topic, because hopefully the self-regulatory body of mobile providers would not green-light blatantly compromised speed tests for one provider.
however, your argument by hypothetical contradiction aside, yes, i will give more credence to the speedtest which reflects the poor performance i observe in practice rather than the suspiciously specific speedtest my provider tells me to use, especially in light of all the other bullshit my de facto monopoly cable provider does.
anecdotally, i have a great experience with t-mobile while in nyc (even better than my friends with verizon or at&t), but it absolutely degrades to shit when i'm in the middle of nowhere.
statistically, i can't offer a thorough analysis. however, it's worth noting that i can cover 99.77% of the population of the entire United States while covering only 84% of its area. it is quite simple: omit Alaska entirely. similarly, i can cover 90% of the population while covering 51% of area by picking the top 25 most densely-populated states.
hopefully this will at least suggest that games can be played by cherry-picking major metropolitan areas, even more easily than picking states. data is available here based on 2013 census: https://pastebin.com/nDsVCK9U
when i called my cable company to complain about the speed of my home internet service (after stuttering on youtube prompting me to do a speed test), they told me that they would only accept a complaint like that if it came from a specific speed testing service, and to try it again with that one. what a surprise that this speed test registered my connection as being ~10x faster.
utterly shameless.
holy shit dude you are fucked up.
i was just kidding before. your solution in PHP is genius & you're one of the few on the right track.
i already said it was a hypothetical; you don't need to be such a condescending dick. i've been around to hear enough discussions along the lines of "i'll talk to my friend at Google/Microsoft/Mozilla and see about getting that implemented", that the possibility of some weird collusion isn't completely crazy.
nonetheless, i agree with you that it's a far-fetched possibility given the information, and that Occam's Razor would imply that Mozilla is simply exhibiting their own organizational inability.
"I honestly don't know what is the matter with some people online, labelling themselves as software developers but being scared of code! Not even understanding a simple algorithm! And reacting aggressively with anyone on account of their own lacks! Constantly lying and thinking that everyone lies to them?!"
methinks he doth protest too much.
seriously, you're out of your fucking league on this one and really don't know what you're talking about. fwiw, it's out of my league too, but i'm at least smart and educated enough to understand what the problem is asking.
and, yes, the downstream "real-world" implications for submitting something worthy of the prize would be incredible. with an efficient solution to N-Queens (essentially a permutation search), you could make everyday cloud-computing hundreds of times more efficient just by automatically optimizing job schedules and processor concurrency. hell, with just a little bit of savvy, you could replace Amazon as the de facto standard compute provider and still have them begging to use your tech for warehouse optimization.
I do wonder about this sometimes. Hypothetically, suppose that Google and, say, Facebook make a Devil's Alliance to propose, on an ongoing basis, backward-incompatible de-facto browser extensions and technical requirements for plugins, etc., all in the name of worthwhile causes such as security, an open web, ease of interoperability, streaming, payment, etc., but at such a breakneck pace with convoluted requirements that it's all but impossible for a company without 10,000+ employees to keep up. If the "web at large" (which, make no mistake, mostly goes along with the diktat of major players like Google and Facebook who literally hold the purse strings of advertisers) demands innovation at a pace where the "open alternative" can't keep up, then the open alternative dies from seemingly-natural causes.
uh, who gives a shit? this is a financial investment strategy, not a moral judgement. lol
Capitalism is defined as an economic system in which capital controls the means of production. How is this not capitalism?
i'm pretty sure that's wrong, because it didn't include "Jesus" or "freedom". also your phrasing practically invites criticism, which is itself tantamount to being a Marxist, and since you're a communist you must be wrong. qed.
yes, and they fired a naive fool who apparently didn't realize that this was his job as a think tank worker (think-tanker?).
"a check of his method, applied to the works of James Joyce, gave the result that Ulysses, Joyce's multi-perspective, multi-style masterpiece, was written by five separate individuals; none of whom had any part in the crafting of Joyce's first novel."
idk, that's the sort of corner case where a failure actually increases credibility. it would be downright suspicious if it identified Joyce distinctly. :)
eh, just restrict yourself to Simplified Technical English or basic English when writing your manifesto, and be sure to randomize both sentence length and word choices.
that's because the new features are for advertisers, not you.