Again, it's language and architecture dependent, but in my case (C99 on x64) the following code produces the wrong result: printf("%i",-1>>1);
In fact, right shift is not equivalent to division by 2 on all machines that use two's complement for binary numbers. So we're talking about at least 99% of all computers out there.
Of course your language/compiler/architecture of choice may not have this problem, but at least right shift is not universally equivalent to division by 2.
Sure. It's a damned fast way to multiply or divide by a power of 2.
That really depends on the language and the machine architecture. Since the compiler has a better grasp of both, it's better to let it make the decision for you.
Plus it invites this type of dangerous thinking: "If left shift is multiplication by 2, then right shift must be division by 2!"
That's the point. Search engines returns different results for different users, depending on user-agent, cookies, country of ISP, OS, IP, previous search history, and the Echelon database. When you want to share a website please post the URL instead of relying on search engines.
For example, your link return entirely NSFW results for me.
There are literally thousands of string hashing algorithms available, many of the them have implementations under BSD/MIT license which you can just copy and paste into your program. If you wrote a custom string hashing algorithm it would be highly suspicious.
Even if the code review doesn't catch you, you will still be fired for reinventing the wheel and polluting the codebase.
1. Wear a Bigfoot costume and approach the border.
2. Frail around for 5 minutes.
3. Take a smoke break and then google "bigfoot Mexican border".
4. If there are no relevant results, you're safe to cross.
5. If there are a few million hits and you find yourself on/. front page, then congratulations on the career move from a deal smuggler to an internet celebrity.
The best part is that you're guaranteed not to be fired upon if spotted by the boarder patrol. Also you can claim you're just perpetrating a hoax if you're caught performing steps 1-3.
That really depends on how you define "browser".
Most slashdotter differentiate browsers by their codebase because we're software oriented and are more concerned about the standard compliance of each browser as opposed to whatever arbitrary string the marketing departments assigns.
If you choose to use the marketing name to differentiate browsers, then please consider the following senario:
Microsoft buys out Opera with $500 million (37% premium) and renames Opera to IE8 SP0.
The victim's family will obviously sue the school, not the instructors. University of Minnesota has more than 2 billion dollars of endowment, while the instructors have next to nothing in comparison.
Actually TFA doesn't say anything about the planets being rocky. Their size imply they're very likely rocky planets, but that has not been confirmed by observation.
You can charge whatever you want, that's your freedom.
Depending on the actual worth of the software and its demand, one of two things will happen:
If the total worth of your software (value to each user * total users in the market) is less than $2,000,000, then obviously no one will buy it and you will earn a total of $0.
If the total worth of your software is greater than $2,000,000, then someone will pay you $2,000,000 to obtain your binary and source and re-distribute both under GPL at a reasonable price. Your competitor will capture the entire market and you will only earn $2,000,000 (a small portion of the entire market in this case). Thus by pricing your software above the market price, you have essentially developed a product for your competitor to sell. They will earn most of the profits while undertaking no risk.
In both cases, charging $1,000,000 for your software is not economically optimal.
In other words, the price of a GPL software is completely determined by the market, since anyone with money can buy you out and re-distribute at the market price. In contrast, the price of proprietary software is less constrained by the market, which explains the fact that almost all commercial software is proprietary.
In reality, however, it's impossible to have commercial GPL software since regardless of the price you charge, [insert evil software company here] could buy it and then maliciously re-distribute it for free, thus completely killing off your revenue stream. Thus GPL implies both libre and gratis in the real world.
Why is everyone surprised that super-earths are orbiting other stars? I've always wondered that.
Because the the term "super-earth" is intentionally used to misled the general public into thinking that those planets have a Earth-like habitat, which imply the possibility of colonization.
If the title was instead "Heavier than Earth rocky planets found outside of the solar system" no one would read it.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, it's language and architecture dependent, but in my case (C99 on x64) the following code produces the wrong result:
printf("%i",-1>>1);
In fact, right shift is not equivalent to division by 2 on all machines that use two's complement for binary numbers. So we're talking about at least 99% of all computers out there.
Of course your language/compiler/architecture of choice may not have this problem, but at least right shift is not universally equivalent to division by 2.
s/atheism/Pastafarianism/g
Just claim that in the Irish denomination of Pastafarianism, "God" is the name of the devil and its utterance is blasphemy.
Sure. It's a damned fast way to multiply or divide by a power of 2.
That really depends on the language and the machine architecture. Since the compiler has a better grasp of both, it's better to let it make the decision for you.
Plus it invites this type of dangerous thinking: "If left shift is multiplication by 2, then right shift must be division by 2!"
So I should dumb myself down with a hammer before writing code?
I'm not sure how I'd reverse the process before debugging though. Maybe I should have thought of that before the hammer came down...
It did for me...
That's the point. Search engines returns different results for different users, depending on user-agent, cookies, country of ISP, OS, IP, previous search history, and the Echelon database. When you want to share a website please post the URL instead of relying on search engines.
For example, your link return entirely NSFW results for me.
No, they should instead share a cell with men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship.
There are literally thousands of string hashing algorithms available, many of the them have implementations under BSD/MIT license which you can just copy and paste into your program. If you wrote a custom string hashing algorithm it would be highly suspicious.
Even if the code review doesn't catch you, you will still be fired for reinventing the wheel and polluting the codebase.
Right after the flying chairs send the editors to the hospital.
mARBLECAKE ALSO THE GAME
Actually GSM requires a stream cipher while your suggestion, AES, is a block cipher and would not work in this case.
Of course it is trivial to turn a block cipher like AES into a stream cipher, but its performance cannot compete with a "native" stream cipher.
Whoosh!
Now all the poor families near the border have access to free video chat.
The only problem is that two minor features have not been implemented yet: audio and recipient selection.
1. Wear a Bigfoot costume and approach the border. /. front page, then congratulations on the career move from a deal smuggler to an internet celebrity.
2. Frail around for 5 minutes.
3. Take a smoke break and then google "bigfoot Mexican border".
4. If there are no relevant results, you're safe to cross.
5. If there are a few million hits and you find yourself on
The best part is that you're guaranteed not to be fired upon if spotted by the boarder patrol. Also you can claim you're just perpetrating a hoax if you're caught performing steps 1-3.
Security through obscurity never works.
No law enforcement agency in the country has the authority to do this.
All proprietary formats are inherently broken.
...noted huntsman T. Boone Pickens, who had previously pressured the school over animal-rights issues.
Don't huntsmen shoot and kill animals?
If you choose to use the marketing name to differentiate browsers, then please consider the following senario:
Microsoft buys out Opera with $500 million (37% premium) and renames Opera to IE8 SP0.
http://xkcd.com/198/
/..
Unless you're a web browser developer, keeping track of global browser market-shares is just plain nerdy. But then again, this is
(I don't want to have to pay some uninsured jerks medical bills for a fight)
Don't worry. Obama covered that for you already.
The victim's family will obviously sue the school, not the instructors. University of Minnesota has more than 2 billion dollars of endowment, while the instructors have next to nothing in comparison.
Actually TFA doesn't say anything about the planets being rocky. Their size imply they're very likely rocky planets, but that has not been confirmed by observation.
You can charge whatever you want, that's your freedom.
Depending on the actual worth of the software and its demand, one of two things will happen:
If the total worth of your software (value to each user * total users in the market) is less than $2,000,000, then obviously no one will buy it and you will earn a total of $0.
If the total worth of your software is greater than $2,000,000, then someone will pay you $2,000,000 to obtain your binary and source and re-distribute both under GPL at a reasonable price. Your competitor will capture the entire market and you will only earn $2,000,000 (a small portion of the entire market in this case). Thus by pricing your software above the market price, you have essentially developed a product for your competitor to sell. They will earn most of the profits while undertaking no risk.
In both cases, charging $1,000,000 for your software is not economically optimal.
In other words, the price of a GPL software is completely determined by the market, since anyone with money can buy you out and re-distribute at the market price. In contrast, the price of proprietary software is less constrained by the market, which explains the fact that almost all commercial software is proprietary.
In reality, however, it's impossible to have commercial GPL software since regardless of the price you charge, [insert evil software company here] could buy it and then maliciously re-distribute it for free, thus completely killing off your revenue stream. Thus GPL implies both libre and gratis in the real world.
Why is everyone surprised that super-earths are orbiting other stars? I've always wondered that.
Because the the term "super-earth" is intentionally used to misled the general public into thinking that those planets have a Earth-like habitat, which imply the possibility of colonization.
If the title was instead "Heavier than Earth rocky planets found outside of the solar system" no one would read it.
Excellent.
If those damn kids put sugar in my gas tank again, I'll get cinnamon buns now instead of a dead engine.
It's pretty obvious now. Desperate blogger looking for a few million hits, and we all fell for it.