The reality is that culture and ethnicity are interdependent and there is absolutely no reason to assume that Chinese people, once lifted out of poverty will choose the same path as Europeans.
The educated young people are still opposed to the central government. The only thing keeping them in power is continued economic growth. I doubt that will work out in the long term.
But then if it does work, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to adopt their system. No one said democracy was perfect.
Suppose function A calls function B, and I want to test A in isolation. How do I do this?
Google Test does provide a way to mock function calls, but only for virtual class methods (which if you know C++, makes a lot of sense). But that means regular old static functions cannot be mocked out. In other words, if I'm using someone else's library, I need to first convince them to change their API. That or write a wrapper for every library call I make. Neither sounds all that appealing to be honest.
My previous post mainly focused on why it's hard to maintain in general. To answer your question, I think by far the biggest difference is readability, and JS being a higher-level language makes it much easier to understand what the code author intend it to do. It hides much of the details with weak typing and automatic memory management, so what a reader sees is just the logical flow.
Yes, the compiler can enforce certain rules, but it's not foolproof and there are lots of ways to misuse a class or function that the compiler cannot check. At some point, the person using the interface needs to understand how it works. While clear documentation is far more important than the code itself for that purpose, diving into the implementation to figure out some detail still happens quite often, as is looking at the unit tests.
The more recent changes to C++ significantly improved readability, but still not to the degree higher-level languages can accomplish. I still run into macro and template magic that takes far longer than it should for me to parse.
However, I've found it far easier to write multiperson, maintainable code in C++ than in JavaScript.
Having worked with well-written projects in both languages (as well as several others), I must disagree. Javascript can be written with maintainability in mind and it doesn't take a genius to do so, only discipline. But C++ is difficult to work with even in the hands of an experienced developer. You end up spending half of your time wrestling with the language to get it to do what you want and the other half digging through core dumps. It's also extremely unforgiving of any mistake. If you're lucky, the entire program crashes. If you're not, it'll go on happily corrupting all of your data. And the fact that it's so difficult to write unit tests doesn't help either.
You can argue that an expert should not be making those mistakes, but in reality, no one is perfect 100% of the time. And even if you were, is it really worth spending that much effort on something a better language or runtime would just handle for you?
The best argument from people who want FB or Google to censor seems to be "there's no law". But that's not a great argument. If there's no law covering this and it's causing problems, then maybe one should be made.
I don't think you necessarily need technical expertise. I was able to gauge how individual team members performed by asking them to size up each task together, then assigning it out randomly. After a few months, it's pretty clear who's getting things done and who's not (they usually have an entertaining list of unforeseen problems and excuses).
I also listen in on their conversations to see who's helping who. Then during individual meet-ups, I ask them for their opinion of other team members. It's pretty clear when several of them tell me "I'm always fixing bugs introduced by X".
most people live within driving distance of a 4 year college and
even more live within driving distance of a community college.
I don't think that's true for a lot of people living in the countryside. Sometimes your nearest grocery store is a 1 hour drive away.
But even if you have one nearby, is it a good university? Does it accept you? There is a huge earning difference between a graduate from a top university and the more run-of-the-mill kind. The median Stanford graduate earns $85k upon graduation (source). The median for UCLA is only $59k, despite it being the one of the best schools in Los Angeles. If you live in LA and you're good enough to be accepted by both, there's every reason to take on a loan to go to Stanford.
Yes, they should have done their own research, but we don't always know everything we should do. There's a lot.
I'd say even doing the research is not always meaningful. In the 4 years it takes for you to graduate, markets will have changed. If a career was in high demand and paying a lot, a ton of students will choose the corresponding major. But when they graduate, there might be so many of them all at once that they flood the market. This happened to biology and chemistry majors back in 2010.
Asking them to choose good majors is basically impossible when that choice changes from year to year. I mean if they were good at predicting the market years in advance, then they could just skip the college and make a living on Wall Street instead.
tuition is now 10k and board another 10k but if you live at home that drops it back down to a very reasonable 10k/year which is very doable
Is off-campus accommodation free in your state or do you expect people to only go to universities within commuting distance of their parents' house?
The whole point of school loans is for poor families who can't support their kids. If their kids live with them, then they're paying extra for the larger apartments required to accommodate everyone. Even if the parents own the house, they're still giving up living space that could be generating rental income. In other words, they'd be indirectly paying for their kids rent.
Most spacecraft radiators reject between 100 and 350 W of internally generated electronics waste heat per square meter.
This translates to 10,000 m^2 for 1 MW of power on the low end. Assuming 10% efficiency of the plant, the total heat output of a 1 MW reactor would need 100,000 m^2 of radiators, which is a circle 180 m in radius.
Since that's a similar size to the plant itself, I imagine any spacecraft capable of containing the plant would be able to host the radiators.
Why can't I run an AP1000 in deep space? It doesn't need the Sun to function. Besides, we're already on a tiny rock hurtling through deep space. Going a bit faster on an even smaller rock is not a fundamentally different situation.
I doubt the Q2 report will show the information everyone wants, which is the production trend over time. If you only look at the quarter average, they won't be making anywhere near 5000 a week, especially given they've had several shutdowns to retool. But it's still possible they ramped up significantly in the final weeks and has a trend line towards 500k for the entire year.
As for their financial situation, I predict they'll still be in the red after accounting for SG&A, though maybe not as bad as last quarter due to the layoffs a few weeks ago. Interest payments will be an even bigger burden and R&D will not have changed much. Finally for capex, it might be a good thing that they didn't get the building permit they wanted and settled for a tent instead.
Their main problem will still be cash flow, since they're not making enough to cover their expenses. If the "pay another $2500 to order now" thing doesn't pan out, they'll need even more high-interest loans, or worst case, another round of stock offerings.
Cloud or no cloud, you need redundant systems for mission-critical software. This means at least one production system and 2 backups ready to handle the load.
If you're running your own, then you should have hardware in 3 separate locations. If you're running in the cloud, then you better have 3 separate providers.
A public library has a budget. My bookcase at home does not, yet I can still read 20-year-old books from it. The fact that web software cannot be kept running without frequent intervention is not a feature, but a major failing of the entire ecosystem.
Slashdot Mirror
The reality is that culture and ethnicity are interdependent and there is absolutely no reason to assume that Chinese people, once lifted out of poverty will choose the same path as Europeans.
The educated young people are still opposed to the central government. The only thing keeping them in power is continued economic growth. I doubt that will work out in the long term.
But then if it does work, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to adopt their system. No one said democracy was perfect.
So just rent a big house and live with lots of other employed people under one roof, and *POOF* you are rich. At least statistically.
You're saving a lot on rent, which if maintained over many years can make you rich.
Suppose function A calls function B, and I want to test A in isolation. How do I do this?
Google Test does provide a way to mock function calls, but only for virtual class methods (which if you know C++, makes a lot of sense). But that means regular old static functions cannot be mocked out. In other words, if I'm using someone else's library, I need to first convince them to change their API. That or write a wrapper for every library call I make. Neither sounds all that appealing to be honest.
Why stop at 4? The sun rises at a different time every day of the year!
My previous post mainly focused on why it's hard to maintain in general. To answer your question, I think by far the biggest difference is readability, and JS being a higher-level language makes it much easier to understand what the code author intend it to do. It hides much of the details with weak typing and automatic memory management, so what a reader sees is just the logical flow.
Yes, the compiler can enforce certain rules, but it's not foolproof and there are lots of ways to misuse a class or function that the compiler cannot check. At some point, the person using the interface needs to understand how it works. While clear documentation is far more important than the code itself for that purpose, diving into the implementation to figure out some detail still happens quite often, as is looking at the unit tests.
The more recent changes to C++ significantly improved readability, but still not to the degree higher-level languages can accomplish. I still run into macro and template magic that takes far longer than it should for me to parse.
However, I've found it far easier to write multiperson, maintainable code in C++ than in JavaScript.
Having worked with well-written projects in both languages (as well as several others), I must disagree. Javascript can be written with maintainability in mind and it doesn't take a genius to do so, only discipline. But C++ is difficult to work with even in the hands of an experienced developer. You end up spending half of your time wrestling with the language to get it to do what you want and the other half digging through core dumps. It's also extremely unforgiving of any mistake. If you're lucky, the entire program crashes. If you're not, it'll go on happily corrupting all of your data. And the fact that it's so difficult to write unit tests doesn't help either.
You can argue that an expert should not be making those mistakes, but in reality, no one is perfect 100% of the time. And even if you were, is it really worth spending that much effort on something a better language or runtime would just handle for you?
Based on voter turnout numbers, I'm guessing anything that's remotely important will not be paid for, except by special interest groups.
The best argument from people who want FB or Google to censor seems to be "there's no law". But that's not a great argument. If there's no law covering this and it's causing problems, then maybe one should be made.
I don't think you necessarily need technical expertise. I was able to gauge how individual team members performed by asking them to size up each task together, then assigning it out randomly. After a few months, it's pretty clear who's getting things done and who's not (they usually have an entertaining list of unforeseen problems and excuses).
I also listen in on their conversations to see who's helping who. Then during individual meet-ups, I ask them for their opinion of other team members. It's pretty clear when several of them tell me "I'm always fixing bugs introduced by X".
The rear is flanked by two vertical, egg whisk-style wind turbines, which add to the power production.
I guess these folks haven't heard of sailing.
It's not even necessarily a failure of management, they often set arbitrary deadlines for no reason.
And yes, working overtime is a bad idea. Not only is it bad for yourself, it fucks up the expectations for everyone else.
most people live within driving distance of a 4 year college and even more live within driving distance of a community college.
I don't think that's true for a lot of people living in the countryside. Sometimes your nearest grocery store is a 1 hour drive away.
But even if you have one nearby, is it a good university? Does it accept you? There is a huge earning difference between a graduate from a top university and the more run-of-the-mill kind. The median Stanford graduate earns $85k upon graduation (source). The median for UCLA is only $59k, despite it being the one of the best schools in Los Angeles. If you live in LA and you're good enough to be accepted by both, there's every reason to take on a loan to go to Stanford.
Yes, they should have done their own research, but we don't always know everything we should do. There's a lot.
I'd say even doing the research is not always meaningful. In the 4 years it takes for you to graduate, markets will have changed. If a career was in high demand and paying a lot, a ton of students will choose the corresponding major. But when they graduate, there might be so many of them all at once that they flood the market. This happened to biology and chemistry majors back in 2010.
Asking them to choose good majors is basically impossible when that choice changes from year to year. I mean if they were good at predicting the market years in advance, then they could just skip the college and make a living on Wall Street instead.
tuition is now 10k and board another 10k but if you live at home that drops it back down to a very reasonable 10k/year which is very doable
Is off-campus accommodation free in your state or do you expect people to only go to universities within commuting distance of their parents' house?
The whole point of school loans is for poor families who can't support their kids. If their kids live with them, then they're paying extra for the larger apartments required to accommodate everyone. Even if the parents own the house, they're still giving up living space that could be generating rental income. In other words, they'd be indirectly paying for their kids rent.
When 2 people in a room throw grenades at each other, does the one with a bigger grenade win?
And 2 days later, it's down 10%.
All that tells me is TSLA has high volatility.
What about artificial gravity?
From Wikipedia:
Most spacecraft radiators reject between 100 and 350 W of internally generated electronics waste heat per square meter.
This translates to 10,000 m^2 for 1 MW of power on the low end. Assuming 10% efficiency of the plant, the total heat output of a 1 MW reactor would need 100,000 m^2 of radiators, which is a circle 180 m in radius.
Since that's a similar size to the plant itself, I imagine any spacecraft capable of containing the plant would be able to host the radiators.
Why can't I run an AP1000 in deep space? It doesn't need the Sun to function. Besides, we're already on a tiny rock hurtling through deep space. Going a bit faster on an even smaller rock is not a fundamentally different situation.
I doubt the Q2 report will show the information everyone wants, which is the production trend over time. If you only look at the quarter average, they won't be making anywhere near 5000 a week, especially given they've had several shutdowns to retool. But it's still possible they ramped up significantly in the final weeks and has a trend line towards 500k for the entire year.
As for their financial situation, I predict they'll still be in the red after accounting for SG&A, though maybe not as bad as last quarter due to the layoffs a few weeks ago. Interest payments will be an even bigger burden and R&D will not have changed much. Finally for capex, it might be a good thing that they didn't get the building permit they wanted and settled for a tent instead.
Their main problem will still be cash flow, since they're not making enough to cover their expenses. If the "pay another $2500 to order now" thing doesn't pan out, they'll need even more high-interest loans, or worst case, another round of stock offerings.
Note that 24 GWh per day is just 1 GW.
Cloud or no cloud, you need redundant systems for mission-critical software. This means at least one production system and 2 backups ready to handle the load.
If you're running your own, then you should have hardware in 3 separate locations. If you're running in the cloud, then you better have 3 separate providers.
The reason you don't blame victims is that most of them aren't in a position to defend themselves.
But in this case, to "defend themselves" is as easy as not telling a stranger over the phone every single piece of their login credentials.
If he doesn't learn from this, he'll lose tens of thousands of dollars when he encounters his first Nigerian prince.
Nah, in this case the scammer should be applauded for educating the "victim" for only the tiny cost of $600.
Can you imagine what would've happened if someone pretended to be his bank? Good thing this scammer got to him first.
A public library has a budget. My bookcase at home does not, yet I can still read 20-year-old books from it. The fact that web software cannot be kept running without frequent intervention is not a feature, but a major failing of the entire ecosystem.