And gamers especially like being able to help NPCs for some reason.
I've read some theories that people who can't save money are people who can't picture the future where they will need that money, I wonder if other moral issues are similar where people just can't think out and picture the consequences of their actions. By playing through moral scenarios of any kind, people are kind of forced to think about the situation and can see it somewhat in real life.
Though I'm not sure how this works with games that take away any consequences. Maybe real life experience complements game experience (as in the examples mentioned above with killing the prostitute to avoid paying, real life experience tells us the consequence while the game exercises the mental scenario). IANAP (I am not a psychologist)...
So in aviation, and I think similar in medical, we have to prove that our tests cover a sufficient amount of the code to show it is astonishingly rare to have the code do something it shouldn't. How practical is this kind of testing with AI systems?
(I could not play online games in our area with cable but U-Verse was fine)
Holy crap man, that was a local problem with your cable and not something magic about U-Verse.
Could be, but at the time when U-Verse arrived (2005 or 8ish?), at a few different houses in the area I tested cable and ping times were regularly 40-80ms and sometimes higher, U-Verse or DSL was pretty steady around 20ms, sometimes a little higher. Been a while since I last did such a test though.
You can improve DSL speed above that though. Currently in Amsterdam they are switching to bonding (everyone already has a double telephone pair), together with vectoring DSL we get 400Mbit/sec.
Would be nice if a phone company in the US would make such an investment...
Look at AT&T U-Verse service. It was marketed as broadband that goes head-to-head with cable internet services or something like Verizon FiOS. Their marketing made a big deal about it using fiber, even. Yet it's *really* just a fancy way to squeeze about 18mbit/sec download speeds, maximum, out of copper wire intended for voice land line phone use. (Sure, they run fiber as far as the nearest phone box at the end of a neighborhood street. But all the gear in the box converts the fiber to a form of DSL service they can run over the copper from there to a customer's site.)
When they first came out with U-Verse it was faster than any available DSL and as around the speed of cable while having much lower ping times (I could not play online games in our area with cable but U-Verse was fine). However that approach has a much lower ceiling than cable so it is no longer that great, and since then cable (or maybe just the provider I moved to) seems to have improved the issue with ping times.
Won't the company be punished for massive privacy violations? In other words: can any other company do the same thing tomorrow and totally get away with such sloppy security? If it is your trade, ignorance is not an excuse. A company that sells communication devices must know how to secure them.
I'm a little curious about the "massive" privacy violations. Are we talking security holes that require years of brute force to break, or something that can be hacked in seconds by a script kiddy? Based on the article saying the data is unencrypted, it seems like the latter.
I'll stick to midsize cars and rent from Home Depot the couple times a year I need to haul something large.
Where I live, I can rent a pickup truck from U-Haul for four hours for less than Home Depot charges for 75 minutes. And Home Depot often doesn't have any trucks available, because they're all in use.
Same price in my area and I didn't have a lot of trouble with availability most days. I thought U-Haul charged by the mile on top of the base rental fee, if not it might make an excellent alternative.
"Though I've never really understood driving a giant vehicle for one passenger and no cargo."
How large are you? If one is very large and/or tall, a truck is pretty much the only vehicle which doesn't feel cramped at this point. They've also been gaining a ton of content over the last couple decades. The average transaction price on a pickup on America is now over 50k! But to get the same amount of stuff in a car that's not tiny, you have to spend even more. Most people who don't actually do work with their truck have the short bed, and rear doors or half-doors, so the bed isn't most of the truck anyway.
If fuel prices ever go up to where they arguably ought to be in America, then you'll see the trucks go away quickly. Until then, they do make some sense.
I'm 5'9" and 145 pounds so fit has never been much of an issue for me (except clothes always seem to be too large). My dad was 6' and ~225 pounds and never had problems with mid-full size cars for fit, though admittedly there are larger people, such as my friend who is ~6'8" and broad shouldered. It was always interesting seeing him drive a VW Jetta for years, until he bought a full size pickup truck. So I'll conceded the point for some individuals.
I'm guessing they don't have assholes driving to their white-collar office jobs and going food shopping in 6-wheel diesel trucks like we have here.
Some of us white collar workers were handed really nice remote VPN setups that only work if less than 10% of employees are remote and the same time, and then told it works better if we are all in the office.
Though I've never really understood driving a giant vehicle for one passenger and no cargo. I'll stick to midsize cars and rent from Home Depot the couple times a year I need to haul something large.
Doesn't the Moto Z support mods? I have a 2 year old Moto Z Play that supports mods. The battery is going so I paid $50 for a new Moto battery mod. I charge it every night and attach it to the phone every morning. That provides me with a day's worth of juice. When this battery pack dies, I can buy another $50 battery pack. Eventually, I'll buy a new phone, but the battery pack mods are helping me delay this purchase.
Hmm, it does support mods, I had not realized that included battery packs, rather than just external speakers and other useless (to me) stuff. Will need to look at when the battery winds down. Thanks for the info!
If my galaxy s5 had not gone blank screen on me, I would not have bought a Moto Z. Sure the Moto Z has a bit better screen but is missing key features like a replaceable batter but is a downgrade to me (it was also the cheapest smartphone I could find by enough to compensate for a couple of battery replacements). So there just isn't anything in a new phone I've found that is a benefit over the old galaxy s5, much less the Moto Z (unless a good new phone comes out with replaceable battery when the Moto Z battery starts declining).
When Verizon forced the smartphone subsidy into the monthly cost I upgraded every couple years because it didn't make sense not to. If they had not dropped that I would have switched to a lower priced mobile service and buy my own phone. Since they did drop me subsidizing new phones, I just don't buy one if I don't have to as it isn't worth it.
This always struck me as a pop-psychology myth. In my experience, the only programmers who have trouble learning new paradigms are the ones who have been using only a single language for 10-20 years, and are thoroughly entrenched.
The stick-in-the-mud attitude is, "Why should I learn a new tool when I know my hammer REALLY well?"
This is my perspective on things. To further misuse the hammer analogy, I look at programming in much the same way, it doesn't matter if it is nails, screws, glue or any other method of putting the pieces together, how you build something starts from the same basics, the specific details are mostly what changes.
There is no way Java was ever #1 in the first place. Give me a break.
Java was an OK language to learn basics. I always had trouble with any Java library I found did 3/4 of what I needed it to do and I had to dig for another library that also did 3/4 of what I wanted and stitch the two together. Though it has been 10+ years since I did any notable Java programming...
OK, feel free to ridicule me on everything I'm getting wrong as I'm a C#/C++/Fortran developer, the only JavaScript I've done is enough for the front end of a simple web game a few years back...
What I know with JavaScript is you have a lot of different ways to use the language, but it was meant to be to C what Java is to C++ but for web development. Or provide something like C's function oriented style that looks more like Java.
So does this mean we are reverting (progressing? subsiding? meh...) back to functional programming? Whatever gets the job done I suppose, as long as people understand what the job is.
Most jobs dominated by men are crappy jobs. Women don't want to do them, if they have any choice, and since most women do have a choice, they don't do them.
Nearly all the cashiers at my grocery stores are women. I guess it depends on your definition of crappy but the job would annoy the crap out of me. To each their own I suppose. One meaningless data point in a world of meaningless data points though.
So if this was a comparison of clubs, Amazon is the club full of pimply-faced, fat chicks and Netflix is the one full of fit 8s, 9s and 10s?
I've looked at a number of Netflix movies, I'm not sure I'd put the rating that high... but then that might push the Amazon rating lower too (I've watched like two movies on Prime, so not qualified to comment there)?
How dare them desire privacy, it's clear we must obscure all surveillance so they are unaware of it.
Desire privacy is fine, expect privacy in a public setting is concerning to me. I mean, people seems to still be surprised when they post on public sites and get caught out? https://www.google.com/search?...
A woman can do pretty much any job a man can (military still a bit fuzzy on some but...), however, a job with high strength requirement is going to be something on average a man can do better than a woman. Thus despite improvements in equality, and the notion pushed by some that a woman can do anything the same as a man (yes there are women that area as strong as most men, but on average women biologically do not have the same strength physically, which says nothing about mentally), there are still perfectly valid reasons for job categories to remain split by gender. If the job is also very simple, except for the strength component, it is very easy to automate.
I think logical math and algorithm are related but not exactly the same as algorithm. Logical math is to find/analyze a solution to the problem regardless how to implement the solution. Algorithm doesn't focus on correctness of the solution but rather to come up with the processes/steps to solve the problem, and then analyze the performance of those processes/steps. So you can't simply ignore one or the other. Often times, you would be doing both together at the same time without knowing.
If there are many of those who are not properly trained in CS in the real world, these people may perform the algorithm part well but would lack the logical part. If they perform the logical part well but not the algorithm part, then it is acceptable but not exceptional...
Yeah, this describes what I was thinking pretty well.
I think it becomes confusing because the logical math, or mathematics logic or something course in my college was not like Boolean logic math but more of the logical thinking math. You have a problem, don't give the answer, write down the process that would be used to find he answer. The sort of thing that programming is really based around, not writing code, but coming up with the optimal process to solve a problem. I'm also not talking about algorithms where you find the fastest solution to a problem, this is kind of the first level before that.
And hopefully it is actually learning CS principals of logical math and algorithms, rather than just learning how to compile Java/C#/Python/whichever the most popular language is.
Woe to the CS program that forgets that CS is also a craft.
Enlightened code monkeys also bring a lot to the table.
Commanding officer: Build this!
Sargeant: How to not get yourself killed when the giant edifice collapses around you in smoke and ruin.
I find that a little bit of theory goes a long way. There's an awful lot of keyboarding practiced in the trenches where command of deep theory is not your primary calling card.
And the theory doesn't need to be deep. Just teaching a student enough theory that they understand the structure of how to develop a program, irrespective of language. As opposed to the simplified here is problem, solution is these lines of code method of teaching, that leaves developers confused later in life when they have to create something different from what they've done before.
Back when I went to college, there was a similar rush - to the extent that one college I applied to, said I couldn't get in because the CS major I had chosen was full! Lucky that wasn't my first choice, but it was a big state school so it was quite a surprise as that was one of the backup choices...
Hopefully this is a more sustained rise in CS interest, which does need good people that understand most CS principals.
And hopefully it is actually learning CS principals of logical math and algorithms, rather than just learning how to compile Java/C#/Python/whichever the most popular language is. Rushes like this concern me a little that the schools wont take the time to teach properly.
Slashdot Mirror
And gamers especially like being able to help NPCs for some reason.
I've read some theories that people who can't save money are people who can't picture the future where they will need that money, I wonder if other moral issues are similar where people just can't think out and picture the consequences of their actions. By playing through moral scenarios of any kind, people are kind of forced to think about the situation and can see it somewhat in real life.
Though I'm not sure how this works with games that take away any consequences. Maybe real life experience complements game experience (as in the examples mentioned above with killing the prostitute to avoid paying, real life experience tells us the consequence while the game exercises the mental scenario). IANAP (I am not a psychologist)...
So in aviation, and I think similar in medical, we have to prove that our tests cover a sufficient amount of the code to show it is astonishingly rare to have the code do something it shouldn't. How practical is this kind of testing with AI systems?
(I could not play online games in our area with cable but U-Verse was fine)
Holy crap man, that was a local problem with your cable and not something magic about U-Verse.
Could be, but at the time when U-Verse arrived (2005 or 8ish?), at a few different houses in the area I tested cable and ping times were regularly 40-80ms and sometimes higher, U-Verse or DSL was pretty steady around 20ms, sometimes a little higher. Been a while since I last did such a test though.
You can improve DSL speed above that though.
Currently in Amsterdam they are switching to bonding (everyone already has a double telephone pair), together with vectoring DSL we get 400Mbit/sec.
Would be nice if a phone company in the US would make such an investment...
Look at AT&T U-Verse service. It was marketed as broadband that goes head-to-head with cable internet services or something like Verizon FiOS. Their marketing made a big deal about it using fiber, even. Yet it's *really* just a fancy way to squeeze about 18mbit/sec download speeds, maximum, out of copper wire intended for voice land line phone use. (Sure, they run fiber as far as the nearest phone box at the end of a neighborhood street. But all the gear in the box converts the fiber to a form of DSL service they can run over the copper from there to a customer's site.)
When they first came out with U-Verse it was faster than any available DSL and as around the speed of cable while having much lower ping times (I could not play online games in our area with cable but U-Verse was fine). However that approach has a much lower ceiling than cable so it is no longer that great, and since then cable (or maybe just the provider I moved to) seems to have improved the issue with ping times.
Won't the company be punished for massive privacy violations? In other words: can any other company do the same thing tomorrow and totally get away with such sloppy security? If it is your trade, ignorance is not an excuse. A company that sells communication devices must know how to secure them.
I'm a little curious about the "massive" privacy violations. Are we talking security holes that require years of brute force to break, or something that can be hacked in seconds by a script kiddy? Based on the article saying the data is unencrypted, it seems like the latter.
I'll stick to midsize cars and rent from Home Depot the couple times a year I need to haul something large.
Where I live, I can rent a pickup truck from U-Haul for four hours for less than Home Depot charges for 75 minutes. And Home Depot often doesn't have any trucks available, because they're all in use.
Same price in my area and I didn't have a lot of trouble with availability most days. I thought U-Haul charged by the mile on top of the base rental fee, if not it might make an excellent alternative.
"Though I've never really understood driving a giant vehicle for one passenger and no cargo."
How large are you? If one is very large and/or tall, a truck is pretty much the only vehicle which doesn't feel cramped at this point. They've also been gaining a ton of content over the last couple decades. The average transaction price on a pickup on America is now over 50k! But to get the same amount of stuff in a car that's not tiny, you have to spend even more. Most people who don't actually do work with their truck have the short bed, and rear doors or half-doors, so the bed isn't most of the truck anyway.
If fuel prices ever go up to where they arguably ought to be in America, then you'll see the trucks go away quickly. Until then, they do make some sense.
I'm 5'9" and 145 pounds so fit has never been much of an issue for me (except clothes always seem to be too large). My dad was 6' and ~225 pounds and never had problems with mid-full size cars for fit, though admittedly there are larger people, such as my friend who is ~6'8" and broad shouldered. It was always interesting seeing him drive a VW Jetta for years, until he bought a full size pickup truck. So I'll conceded the point for some individuals.
I'm guessing they don't have assholes driving to their white-collar office jobs and going food shopping in 6-wheel diesel trucks like we have here.
Some of us white collar workers were handed really nice remote VPN setups that only work if less than 10% of employees are remote and the same time, and then told it works better if we are all in the office.
Though I've never really understood driving a giant vehicle for one passenger and no cargo. I'll stick to midsize cars and rent from Home Depot the couple times a year I need to haul something large.
Doesn't the Moto Z support mods? I have a 2 year old Moto Z Play that supports mods. The battery is going so I paid $50 for a new Moto battery mod. I charge it every night and attach it to the phone every morning. That provides me with a day's worth of juice. When this battery pack dies, I can buy another $50 battery pack. Eventually, I'll buy a new phone, but the battery pack mods are helping me delay this purchase.
Hmm, it does support mods, I had not realized that included battery packs, rather than just external speakers and other useless (to me) stuff. Will need to look at when the battery winds down. Thanks for the info!
If my galaxy s5 had not gone blank screen on me, I would not have bought a Moto Z. Sure the Moto Z has a bit better screen but is missing key features like a replaceable batter but is a downgrade to me (it was also the cheapest smartphone I could find by enough to compensate for a couple of battery replacements). So there just isn't anything in a new phone I've found that is a benefit over the old galaxy s5, much less the Moto Z (unless a good new phone comes out with replaceable battery when the Moto Z battery starts declining).
When Verizon forced the smartphone subsidy into the monthly cost I upgraded every couple years because it didn't make sense not to. If they had not dropped that I would have switched to a lower priced mobile service and buy my own phone. Since they did drop me subsidizing new phones, I just don't buy one if I don't have to as it isn't worth it.
Well Russians aren't making posts to scare people on Slashdot. Wait... (squints at the article)
This always struck me as a pop-psychology myth. In my experience, the only programmers who have trouble learning new paradigms are the ones who have been using only a single language for 10-20 years, and are thoroughly entrenched.
The stick-in-the-mud attitude is, "Why should I learn a new tool when I know my hammer REALLY well?"
This is my perspective on things. To further misuse the hammer analogy, I look at programming in much the same way, it doesn't matter if it is nails, screws, glue or any other method of putting the pieces together, how you build something starts from the same basics, the specific details are mostly what changes.
There is no way Java was ever #1 in the first place. Give me a break.
Java was an OK language to learn basics. I always had trouble with any Java library I found did 3/4 of what I needed it to do and I had to dig for another library that also did 3/4 of what I wanted and stitch the two together. Though it has been 10+ years since I did any notable Java programming...
OK, feel free to ridicule me on everything I'm getting wrong as I'm a C#/C++/Fortran developer, the only JavaScript I've done is enough for the front end of a simple web game a few years back...
What I know with JavaScript is you have a lot of different ways to use the language, but it was meant to be to C what Java is to C++ but for web development. Or provide something like C's function oriented style that looks more like Java.
So does this mean we are reverting (progressing? subsiding? meh...) back to functional programming? Whatever gets the job done I suppose, as long as people understand what the job is.
Most jobs dominated by men are crappy jobs. Women don't want to do them, if they have any choice, and since most women do have a choice, they don't do them.
Nearly all the cashiers at my grocery stores are women. I guess it depends on your definition of crappy but the job would annoy the crap out of me. To each their own I suppose. One meaningless data point in a world of meaningless data points though.
Or it is gamed by a bunch of script kiddies. Either way, the ratings are useless.
Yeah, personal reasons is kind of a broad stroke which can of course include my bank account or my love of screwing with people.
So if this was a comparison of clubs, Amazon is the club full of pimply-faced, fat chicks and Netflix is the one full of fit 8s, 9s and 10s?
I've looked at a number of Netflix movies, I'm not sure I'd put the rating that high... but then that might push the Amazon rating lower too (I've watched like two movies on Prime, so not qualified to comment there)?
The top rated movie of ALL TIME on Rotten Tomatoes is "Black Panther". So....yeah.
You mean ratings push the movie more people like for personal reasons to the top, rather than the movie with the highest cinematic quality? Hmm.
How dare them desire privacy, it's clear we must obscure all surveillance so they are unaware of it.
Desire privacy is fine, expect privacy in a public setting is concerning to me. I mean, people seems to still be surprised when they post on public sites and get caught out? https://www.google.com/search?...
A woman can do pretty much any job a man can (military still a bit fuzzy on some but...), however, a job with high strength requirement is going to be something on average a man can do better than a woman. Thus despite improvements in equality, and the notion pushed by some that a woman can do anything the same as a man (yes there are women that area as strong as most men, but on average women biologically do not have the same strength physically, which says nothing about mentally), there are still perfectly valid reasons for job categories to remain split by gender. If the job is also very simple, except for the strength component, it is very easy to automate.
I think logical math and algorithm are related but not exactly the same as algorithm. Logical math is to find/analyze a solution to the problem regardless how to implement the solution. Algorithm doesn't focus on correctness of the solution but rather to come up with the processes/steps to solve the problem, and then analyze the performance of those processes/steps. So you can't simply ignore one or the other. Often times, you would be doing both together at the same time without knowing.
If there are many of those who are not properly trained in CS in the real world, these people may perform the algorithm part well but would lack the logical part. If they perform the logical part well but not the algorithm part, then it is acceptable but not exceptional...
Yeah, this describes what I was thinking pretty well.
Learning principles would be even better.
I think it becomes confusing because the logical math, or mathematics logic or something course in my college was not like Boolean logic math but more of the logical thinking math. You have a problem, don't give the answer, write down the process that would be used to find he answer. The sort of thing that programming is really based around, not writing code, but coming up with the optimal process to solve a problem. I'm also not talking about algorithms where you find the fastest solution to a problem, this is kind of the first level before that.
Woe to the CS program that forgets that CS is also a craft.
Enlightened code monkeys also bring a lot to the table.
Commanding officer: Build this!
Sargeant: How to not get yourself killed when the giant edifice collapses around you in smoke and ruin.
I find that a little bit of theory goes a long way. There's an awful lot of keyboarding practiced in the trenches where command of deep theory is not your primary calling card.
And the theory doesn't need to be deep. Just teaching a student enough theory that they understand the structure of how to develop a program, irrespective of language. As opposed to the simplified here is problem, solution is these lines of code method of teaching, that leaves developers confused later in life when they have to create something different from what they've done before.
Back when I went to college, there was a similar rush - to the extent that one college I applied to, said I couldn't get in because the CS major I had chosen was full! Lucky that wasn't my first choice, but it was a big state school so it was quite a surprise as that was one of the backup choices...
Hopefully this is a more sustained rise in CS interest, which does need good people that understand most CS principals.
And hopefully it is actually learning CS principals of logical math and algorithms, rather than just learning how to compile Java/C#/Python/whichever the most popular language is. Rushes like this concern me a little that the schools wont take the time to teach properly.