uh, health insurance means that society would be footing the bill.
The sorts of people who want to solve their problems by beating the shit out of each other don't care whether it's legal or not -- they're going to do it ANYWAY. And guess what -- we ALREADY pay, as a society, for the injuries sustained in street brawls.
The only difference here, is that by making street fighting legal, we no longer have to pay to INCARCERATE the participants. Obviously this SAVES us money.
Yes, but you would not describe that as "creating antigravity." Use the word "antigravity" if you want but don't talk about creating something, because you aren't.
So if you get something to spin fast enough that material on the outer edges reaches linear speed near to c, it gets heavier and as result its gravity increases. By pumping arbitrary amounts of energy into rotation you're arbitrarily increasing the mass and as result creating a small body that isn't travelling in space but has arbitrarily high gravity.
Any object made of real materials would shatter at rotational speeds much less than the speed of light.
We're totally getting into la-la land here, but IF the computer was able to accurately predict where a weapon would strike, it should be able to focus all the shield energy into that one location, making the shields many orders of magnitude more effective.
I think you've been to one of the world's many "Mystery spots." In Oregon there is a location called the Oregon Vortex where water apparently runs uphill. Of course, it's not really the case.
These locations all share a certain property in common -- there is a nearby "horizon" which isn't actually a horizon. This tricks your brain into thinking that "vertical" is in a direction other than what it really is. In order to reconcile the conflicting information, your brain perceives a non-existent force. In the case of your crater, the horizon might have been the crater lip. You think it's level, when in fact it isn't.
On Highway 26 in Oregon (the road from Portland to Mt. Hood) there is a spot where you feel as if your car is headed downhill. However, if you actually stop at this location, your car begins to roll BACKWARDS. It's not antigravity, it's just a strange landscape that tricks you into thinking you're heading downhill when you're actually pointed uphill.
For example, when a program crashes in OS X there is a spinning beachball
I fucking HATE that. Sometimes Safari loses sanity and I get the dreaded beachball. Guess what -- the system menu is modal to the application, which means I can't select Force Quit. Instead I have to open a terminal and type 'killall Safari'. What the HOLY FUCK?
Who said latches were boring? My mom likes to tell the story of how I was 6 months old, sitting in a crib, and I'd love to look at the hinges on my bedroom door as the door opened and closed. I guess I was trying to figure out how they worked.
If hinges are that fascinating, imagine how incredible the infantile study of LATCHES must be!!
Last I checked, Universities were a place that offered education in exchange for M-O-N-E-Y. Adjusting to Johnny and Suzy's learning style is called customer service.
If you feel you can find better "customer service" at a different institution, then by all means, good luck on your quest.
Since we all know that's bullshit, the least the university could do is make sure they own up to the original agreement: Education for money. Johnny and Suzy should be able to learn the material if they really want to do so.
In any manner they wish? What if I learn best by taking notes in magic marker all over my naked body? At some point the line must be drawn where your learning methods start interfering with other students. This professor has apparently concluded that laptops are too distracting to permit in her classroom. Maybe you disagree -- find another class to take. If you simply CANNOT learn without a laptop in front of you, you have a learning disability and should probably seek help for that.
I'm not talking about handing out 4.0's to everyone. I'm talking about bending over backwards to accommodate them after hours if necessary.
I've known a great many professors who gladly spend hours of their own time with students. There's a big difference between disallowing laptops in a classroom and ignoring your students. It seems to me this professor is trying very hard to make the classroom environment MORE amenable to learning. Again, if you disagree with the methods, find someone else to learn from.
No, the university is a place where you learn knowledge. Any personal growth you may achieve there is tangential to the purpose of the university, and completely irrelevant for this discussion.
Actually, a university is a place where research is conducted. The purpose of the university is not to teach you, its function is to produce graduates and grow its research base. You get out of it only what you choose to take from it. If you don't want to take the lesson of how to learn even when information is not presented in your ideal way, then you've missed something big.
A number of us did just this. Not only did I have a ton of fun along the way, but am more successful that I would have been had I stayed in school. Mechanical Engineering?! WTF was I thinking?!
That's great (really). But I'd wager a guess that you did what you did because you saw the potential in a different path and knew that you could realize it, as opposed to dropping out due to righteous indignation because things weren't going "your way." A person who would drop out just to "stick it" to the university is probably not full of potential anyway.
While I believe in god, I choose not to worship the professor. My professor is not my master, and do we really want to encourage the worship of professors?
This has nothing to do with worship or even respect. It has to do with learning how to learn even when the teacher isn't a perfect teacher. The world is not going to stop for you because you're confused. Information comes at you every which way and you either succeed in processing it or you fail.
Our only job is to get an A, any way we know how, and it's not the professors job to tell us how to learn. It's bad enough we have to let the professors tell us how and what to think. Now you want the professor to tell us what tools to us?
If laptops were not an ENORMOUS distraction in the classroom, I would not be agreeing with this professor's position. Your "right" to use whatever tool you want ends at the point where it becomes detrimental to other students. They're also "paying customers," right?
Have you forgotten that teachers are not OUR BOSSES? WE are THEIR CUSTOMERS. They offer us a SERVICE for which we PAY, with our money AND taxes. If anyone must go, it should be the inefficient teachers, not the students.
As I said, fire your professors if you don't like them. This is a simple matter of dropping out of school.
No, it is incumbent on YOU to figure out how to process the information handed out by the professor, however he damn well pleases to impart that information. This is not a third grade classroom where Johnny is a "visual learner" and Sarah is "learns through story telling." In the real world people will not magically adjust to your "personal learning style." They are going to feed you information and you are going to have to deal with it.
A University is a place where you turn into an actual adult, not just a physically mature human being. Grow up and learn to handle reality.
I pay for University and I'll be damned if a Professor will tell me how I'm going to learn and if I can/can't take my laptop to the class I am paying for.
Looks like you're "damned" then. Good luck presenting the "but I'm paying for it!" argument to the deans. Have fun dropping out of school to pursue your ideals.
Let me introduce you to my friend called Saving. One month, you put $5 in a box. The next month you put another $5 in the box. Amazingly, after 9 months you have $45 in the box. Whoa.
I've done that, and it's a serious pain. I'm also not convinced that it won't fuck various things up. For one thing, there is now a many-to-one mapping from usernames to UIDs. The mapping is supposed to be bijective, and a lot of system software probably depends on it. Is your "true username" the associated name from/etc/passwd (in which case all the users would be called "root" presumably because it's first in the list), or does it derive from the $USER environment variable (in which case the user could alter the username as he pleases)?
And consider the zillions of applications which use your username. Do they get it from/etc/passwd (which would be wrong) or do they get it from $USER (which could also be maliciously set wrong)?
Having multiple users sharing a UID is an administrative disaster.
BF2 for example. This game is ALL physics... I love it personally, and one of the coolest (and crappy) things is when you get shelled by artillary 500 yards into the air. Your limbs are flying everywhere and the FPS decrease is noticeable when there are 10 or so soliders all ragdolled in the air (i'm sure particles have a lot to do with this also, but IAN a FPS programmer).
Uh, that's highly unlikely. The physics of a flying body is no more difficult to compute that the physics of a running body. "Particle systems" are not the reason for the slowdown, more likely, it has to do with the fact that a player at high altitude can see a LOT of the game world and therefore more packets have to be sent in order to maintain a consistent view as the player flies through the air.
The way to do this is to introduce a new function that wraps it and does it only in the thread it was called in, but that's a pain.
No, the way it WOULD be implemented is as a new CLONE_ flag to clone(2) which would indicate that the child thread would not share the working directory with its parent. So in addition to CLONE_PID, CLONE_VM, CLONE_FILES etc we would have CLONE_CWD.
It's not done, but if it was going to be done that's HOW it would be done.
If I was an employer, only two things would really concern me. One, the candidates competance and skill at performing the required labour, and two, the amount of compensation the candidate was willing to perform the labour for.
What about three, whether the employee can get along effectively with other people in the office, or four, whether the candidate is actually a corporate spy looking to steal sensitive information? I'm not saying a quick Google search is going to reveal details like that to you, but you're insane to suggest that the two factors you listed are the only two important criteria when hiring an employee. Personal aspects can be, and are, important in hiring decisions.
We spend 8 hours of our days in offices working with other people. A large portion of our social lives take place in office buildings. Work isn't just a place of employment, it's an entire different half of our lives, and the unbridled ability to do the work isn't all that matters.
Almost no one. Libertarians are the only party that actually believes in restoring all of the rights republicans and democrats stole long ago (and continue to steal). Libertarians are the only group that believes in the philosophy of liberty and don't waver from its principles when facing difficult scenarios.
Thinking that there is only one right social and economic order, thinking that one's own political contingent is the only valid way forward -- this is Fundamentalism.
I suspect that with smaller binaries, there is reduced disk I/O, reduced page faults, and reduced RAM usage which is more worthwhile than the extra optimizations in O2.
-Os and -O2 are closely related. It could be that some of the -O2 optimizations are actually counterproductive for your particular application. In addition, a smaller binary size means more code can fit in cache, which leads to fewer cache misses. -Os is the same as -O2 but with code-size-increasing optimizations turned off (such as loop unrolling).
It would be enlightening to run the application under cachegrind with the two optimization configurations. I suspect that the -Os binary has a lower percentage of instruction cache misses.
One difference between compiling from source and using a precompiled binary that is often overlooked, is that the precompiled binary has possibly been tested. In comparison, a binary you build yourself have never been tested by anyone, anywhere. There are so many possible variances between build environments that it's unlikely any two people will ever compile to the exact same binary.
An unforgivable mistake in the sphere of commercial software is to test a DEBUG build and release an OPTIMIZED build. The binary you are releasing is different from the one you tested -- in effect, you are releasing untested code! This is one of the problems with a debugging scheme centered around conditional compilation. The very presence of the debugging code can affect the behavior and appearance of the bug.
If you could boost performance by 10% by tweaking some compiler settings, you would have done so already (and a task so simple would not be worth a 100% pay raise). So your example is inapplicable to the argument.
Slashdot Mirror
57 68 61 74 27 73 20 65 76 65 6E 20 77 6F 72 73 65 2C 20 69 73 20 74 68 61 74 20 49 20 61 6C 72 65 61 64 79 20 68 61 64 20 61 20 70 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 20 73 69 74 74 69 6E 67 20 61 72 6F 75 6E 64 20 74 6F 0A 64 65 63 6F 64 65 20 74 68 65 73 65 20 74 68 69 6E 67 73 20 3A 2D 28
The sorts of people who want to solve their problems by beating the shit out of each other don't care whether it's legal or not -- they're going to do it ANYWAY. And guess what -- we ALREADY pay, as a society, for the injuries sustained in street brawls.
The only difference here, is that by making street fighting legal, we no longer have to pay to INCARCERATE the participants. Obviously this SAVES us money.
Yes, but you would not describe that as "creating antigravity." Use the word "antigravity" if you want but don't talk about creating something, because you aren't.
Any object made of real materials would shatter at rotational speeds much less than the speed of light.
We're totally getting into la-la land here, but IF the computer was able to accurately predict where a weapon would strike, it should be able to focus all the shield energy into that one location, making the shields many orders of magnitude more effective.
These locations all share a certain property in common -- there is a nearby "horizon" which isn't actually a horizon. This tricks your brain into thinking that "vertical" is in a direction other than what it really is. In order to reconcile the conflicting information, your brain perceives a non-existent force. In the case of your crater, the horizon might have been the crater lip. You think it's level, when in fact it isn't.
On Highway 26 in Oregon (the road from Portland to Mt. Hood) there is a spot where you feel as if your car is headed downhill. However, if you actually stop at this location, your car begins to roll BACKWARDS. It's not antigravity, it's just a strange landscape that tricks you into thinking you're heading downhill when you're actually pointed uphill.
I fucking HATE that. Sometimes Safari loses sanity and I get the dreaded beachball. Guess what -- the system menu is modal to the application, which means I can't select Force Quit. Instead I have to open a terminal and type 'killall Safari'. What the HOLY FUCK?
If hinges are that fascinating, imagine how incredible the infantile study of LATCHES must be!!
If you feel you can find better "customer service" at a different institution, then by all means, good luck on your quest.
Since we all know that's bullshit, the least the university could do is make sure they own up to the original agreement: Education for money. Johnny and Suzy should be able to learn the material if they really want to do so.
In any manner they wish? What if I learn best by taking notes in magic marker all over my naked body? At some point the line must be drawn where your learning methods start interfering with other students. This professor has apparently concluded that laptops are too distracting to permit in her classroom. Maybe you disagree -- find another class to take. If you simply CANNOT learn without a laptop in front of you, you have a learning disability and should probably seek help for that.
I'm not talking about handing out 4.0's to everyone. I'm talking about bending over backwards to accommodate them after hours if necessary.
I've known a great many professors who gladly spend hours of their own time with students. There's a big difference between disallowing laptops in a classroom and ignoring your students. It seems to me this professor is trying very hard to make the classroom environment MORE amenable to learning. Again, if you disagree with the methods, find someone else to learn from.
And I'm not a professor, by the way.
Actually, a university is a place where research is conducted. The purpose of the university is not to teach you, its function is to produce graduates and grow its research base. You get out of it only what you choose to take from it. If you don't want to take the lesson of how to learn even when information is not presented in your ideal way, then you've missed something big.
That's great (really). But I'd wager a guess that you did what you did because you saw the potential in a different path and knew that you could realize it, as opposed to dropping out due to righteous indignation because things weren't going "your way." A person who would drop out just to "stick it" to the university is probably not full of potential anyway.
This has nothing to do with worship or even respect. It has to do with learning how to learn even when the teacher isn't a perfect teacher. The world is not going to stop for you because you're confused. Information comes at you every which way and you either succeed in processing it or you fail.
Our only job is to get an A, any way we know how, and it's not the professors job to tell us how to learn. It's bad enough we have to let the professors tell us how and what to think. Now you want the professor to tell us what tools to us?
If laptops were not an ENORMOUS distraction in the classroom, I would not be agreeing with this professor's position. Your "right" to use whatever tool you want ends at the point where it becomes detrimental to other students. They're also "paying customers," right?
As I said, fire your professors if you don't like them. This is a simple matter of dropping out of school.
A University is a place where you turn into an actual adult, not just a physically mature human being. Grow up and learn to handle reality.
Gin? My God, looks like we have a lot of work to do here, men.
Looks like you're "damned" then. Good luck presenting the "but I'm paying for it!" argument to the deans. Have fun dropping out of school to pursue your ideals.
Let me introduce you to my friend called Saving. One month, you put $5 in a box. The next month you put another $5 in the box. Amazingly, after 9 months you have $45 in the box. Whoa.
And consider the zillions of applications which use your username. Do they get it from /etc/passwd (which would be wrong) or do they get it from $USER (which could also be maliciously set wrong)?
Having multiple users sharing a UID is an administrative disaster.
Uh, that's highly unlikely. The physics of a flying body is no more difficult to compute that the physics of a running body. "Particle systems" are not the reason for the slowdown, more likely, it has to do with the fact that a player at high altitude can see a LOT of the game world and therefore more packets have to be sent in order to maintain a consistent view as the player flies through the air.
No, the way it WOULD be implemented is as a new CLONE_ flag to clone(2) which would indicate that the child thread would not share the working directory with its parent. So in addition to CLONE_PID, CLONE_VM, CLONE_FILES etc we would have CLONE_CWD.
It's not done, but if it was going to be done that's HOW it would be done.
What about three, whether the employee can get along effectively with other people in the office, or four, whether the candidate is actually a corporate spy looking to steal sensitive information? I'm not saying a quick Google search is going to reveal details like that to you, but you're insane to suggest that the two factors you listed are the only two important criteria when hiring an employee. Personal aspects can be, and are, important in hiring decisions.
We spend 8 hours of our days in offices working with other people. A large portion of our social lives take place in office buildings. Work isn't just a place of employment, it's an entire different half of our lives, and the unbridled ability to do the work isn't all that matters.
Thinking that there is only one right social and economic order, thinking that one's own political contingent is the only valid way forward -- this is Fundamentalism.
-Os and -O2 are closely related. It could be that some of the -O2 optimizations are actually counterproductive for your particular application. In addition, a smaller binary size means more code can fit in cache, which leads to fewer cache misses. -Os is the same as -O2 but with code-size-increasing optimizations turned off (such as loop unrolling).
It would be enlightening to run the application under cachegrind with the two optimization configurations. I suspect that the -Os binary has a lower percentage of instruction cache misses.
An unforgivable mistake in the sphere of commercial software is to test a DEBUG build and release an OPTIMIZED build. The binary you are releasing is different from the one you tested -- in effect, you are releasing untested code! This is one of the problems with a debugging scheme centered around conditional compilation. The very presence of the debugging code can affect the behavior and appearance of the bug.
If you could boost performance by 10% by tweaking some compiler settings, you would have done so already (and a task so simple would not be worth a 100% pay raise). So your example is inapplicable to the argument.