And it's not that hard. Some people make it hard because they're incompetent. The golden rule of multithreading is: your multithreading set-up has to be very simple. Don't optimize (and for the love of god, unless you really understand cache coherence, don't use atomics), aim for clarity, use mutex locks for shared data, and if you have to use several, make sure you acquire them in the same order. 99.9% of the problems disappear if you follow this simple advice.
Freedom of the internet is one of the things that got him elected. If HRC could shut it down, she would, to control the narrative and stop the skeletons from falling out of the closet.
He has that much between seat cushions at the Trump tower. And he's married to a former model. So do us all a favor, and take your liberal bullshit elsewhere. One of the candidates made a hundred million dollars selling influence. That's an unassailable, verified fact. I'll leave it to you to figure out which candidate that is.
If you hope that this would change the outcome, you'd be disappointed. Trump would just change his campaign strategy to target different areas and tweak his message to win those areas. He did A LOT more rallies than Hillary, sometimes doing up to five _per day_, and the attendance at those was an order of magnitude higher, with some rallies running 10K people or more. He simply got more exposure to the people who voted and promised them the things they cared about.
This is a vote against the establishments. Democrats lost it in June when they screwed Sanders out of his well deserved nomination.
Trump's WIFE is an immigrant, and his campaign was run (successfully) by a woman. Can we stop with this "he's a xenophobe misogynist" bullshit? Being in favor of strong border security is in no way anti-immigrant. I say so as a naturalized citizen myself. Play by the rules, and you'll be fine.
I fully expect Trump to show them the middle finger on some of those reversals, if for no other reason than to have legislative leverage. Remember, most of them failed to bend the knee and endorse. Their relationship with the Trump administration will be strained at best, so it'll have to be a game of "give and take", not "I'll sign whatever you guys pass".
It's on its way to get canceled. The company doesn't sell much in the way of physical goods. They simply don't need a drone project. They spun it up for PR, but now that PR dividend is dwindling, they're probably looking to wrap it up. I'll give it another year or so.
Here it goes: "An old man is lying on a bed in his room. It's year 1917, the Socialist revolution is in full swing. His grandson runs excitedly into the room and proclaims: "The Bolsheviks are winning, there won't be any rich people anymore!" To which his grandfather replies: "Weird, back in our day we revolted so that there wouldn't be any poor people, not to get rid of the rich".
Which is a long way of suggesting: maybe a better question to ask is why the non-US programmers are paid so poorly. TBH I don't think US programmers are that well paid, outside of relatively few outliers. They tend to live in the areas with some of the highest cost of living in the world. That's out of necessity: all the high paying jobs are there. I'd say a good fraction of US high tech professionals is what real middle class is supposed to look like. Not rich, but with a roof over their head and non-zero savings. I don't consider that a privilege. I consider that a bare minimum.
WaPo is owned by Bezos, you won't find anything whatsoever that could jeopardize HRC's presidential run there.
But on the substance of your accusation, Barack Obama is campaigning for Hillary on taxpayer dime. Is that not a violation of the Hatch Act? If not, explain.
Is that what you call it, "controversial"? I'd sure hope that pardoning a convicted criminal at the last possible moment in exchange for a couple of million in "donations" is more than just "controversial". What does Bubba need to do in order for people to finally admit he has no moral compass? Publicly behead someone?
Fact of the matter is, different ethnicities have different needs. Black people need different hair products, prefer to buy different clothing and shoes, listen to different music, eat different foods. Men don't buy high heels or cosmetics. Women aren't very interested in power tools or car related trinkets. And so on and so forth. There's this notion that differentiating by need is sexism/racism/etc-ism somehow, but it really isn't. Stereotypes are rooted in reality. All those advertisers are trying to do is sell as much stuff as possible while paying as little for advertising as possible. They couldn't care less about which exact demographics buy stuff. They only care that those demographics are more or less likely to make a purchase decision as a result of seeing an ad. So yes, chicken and watermelons will get shown to black folks, and coffee, by and large, won't be. The way to "fight" this (if you feel passionate enough about the issue) is not by getting your panties in a bunch, but by eliminating the incentive: that is, by getting the particular demographic to _not_ make a particular purchase decision. Do that, and the "problem" will go away on its own.
Google actually did research on this. They've found that, counterintuitively, it's dangerous to have a "mostly" autonomous car that can yield to a human driver at any moment. People tend to underestimate how much context they're holding in their head as they are driving. Acquiring that context at a moment's notice is just not really possible, so people tend to make stupid decisions if they weren't already paying attention. So it has to be either 100% hands free, or it'll have to be sold as a glorified driver safety system. That's why the cute little self driving cars that Google uses on its campus don't have a steering wheel at all.
I actually disagree with 99% assertion. The relative importance of problems matters here. To succeed, this technology needs to be _substantially_ safer than humans _in all cases that matter_, not in all possible cases. That having been said, even with a relaxed problem statement like this, with today's technology this is a nearly insurmountable goal.
Slashdot Mirror
I meant what I've written. Read up on MESI protocol. It's all about cache coherence.
And it's not that hard. Some people make it hard because they're incompetent. The golden rule of multithreading is: your multithreading set-up has to be very simple. Don't optimize (and for the love of god, unless you really understand cache coherence, don't use atomics), aim for clarity, use mutex locks for shared data, and if you have to use several, make sure you acquire them in the same order. 99.9% of the problems disappear if you follow this simple advice.
Freedom of the internet is one of the things that got him elected. If HRC could shut it down, she would, to control the narrative and stop the skeletons from falling out of the closet.
He has that much between seat cushions at the Trump tower. And he's married to a former model. So do us all a favor, and take your liberal bullshit elsewhere. One of the candidates made a hundred million dollars selling influence. That's an unassailable, verified fact. I'll leave it to you to figure out which candidate that is.
The question is, does it come with a foldable fire extinguisher?
If you hope that this would change the outcome, you'd be disappointed. Trump would just change his campaign strategy to target different areas and tweak his message to win those areas. He did A LOT more rallies than Hillary, sometimes doing up to five _per day_, and the attendance at those was an order of magnitude higher, with some rallies running 10K people or more. He simply got more exposure to the people who voted and promised them the things they cared about.
This is a vote against the establishments. Democrats lost it in June when they screwed Sanders out of his well deserved nomination.
Trump's WIFE is an immigrant, and his campaign was run (successfully) by a woman. Can we stop with this "he's a xenophobe misogynist" bullshit? Being in favor of strong border security is in no way anti-immigrant. I say so as a naturalized citizen myself. Play by the rules, and you'll be fine.
I fully expect Trump to show them the middle finger on some of those reversals, if for no other reason than to have legislative leverage. Remember, most of them failed to bend the knee and endorse. Their relationship with the Trump administration will be strained at best, so it'll have to be a game of "give and take", not "I'll sign whatever you guys pass".
The only reason it costs so much is because there's a drug import ban WHICH TRUMP EXPLICITLY PROMISED TO END.
It was a choice between stage 4 cancer and foot fungus, and people have picked the curable disease.
It's on its way to get canceled. The company doesn't sell much in the way of physical goods. They simply don't need a drone project. They spun it up for PR, but now that PR dividend is dwindling, they're probably looking to wrap it up. I'll give it another year or so.
"Freely share the public version of their personal lives". Kind of like Clinton: one position for Goldman Sachs, another for the voting public.
Here it goes: "An old man is lying on a bed in his room. It's year 1917, the Socialist revolution is in full swing. His grandson runs excitedly into the room and proclaims: "The Bolsheviks are winning, there won't be any rich people anymore!" To which his grandfather replies: "Weird, back in our day we revolted so that there wouldn't be any poor people, not to get rid of the rich".
Which is a long way of suggesting: maybe a better question to ask is why the non-US programmers are paid so poorly. TBH I don't think US programmers are that well paid, outside of relatively few outliers. They tend to live in the areas with some of the highest cost of living in the world. That's out of necessity: all the high paying jobs are there. I'd say a good fraction of US high tech professionals is what real middle class is supposed to look like. Not rich, but with a roof over their head and non-zero savings. I don't consider that a privilege. I consider that a bare minimum.
I'm sure if Carlsen asked, they would port whatever software he needed even to Commodore 64 for an endorsement.
You'll have a computer that doesn't open any ports to the world by default.
It's like asking Hannibal Lecter for cooking tips. Just use OSX or Linux. Problem solved.
Neither is FBI unloading dirt on the presidential candidate. Bush the senior got pwned pretty bad back in the day: http://www.washingtonexaminer....
I can build a drone MYSELF for less than a hundred bucks in half a day. You don't need a "manufacturer" to have one.
You mean like the POTUS who's currently campaigning for Clinton on taxpayer dime and time?
WaPo is owned by Bezos, you won't find anything whatsoever that could jeopardize HRC's presidential run there.
But on the substance of your accusation, Barack Obama is campaigning for Hillary on taxpayer dime. Is that not a violation of the Hatch Act? If not, explain.
Is that what you call it, "controversial"? I'd sure hope that pardoning a convicted criminal at the last possible moment in exchange for a couple of million in "donations" is more than just "controversial". What does Bubba need to do in order for people to finally admit he has no moral compass? Publicly behead someone?
And it was a disaster. Drivers just plain weren't ready. BSODs for months, epic fail. Thankfully, Apple is smarter than that.
Fact of the matter is, different ethnicities have different needs. Black people need different hair products, prefer to buy different clothing and shoes, listen to different music, eat different foods. Men don't buy high heels or cosmetics. Women aren't very interested in power tools or car related trinkets. And so on and so forth. There's this notion that differentiating by need is sexism/racism/etc-ism somehow, but it really isn't. Stereotypes are rooted in reality. All those advertisers are trying to do is sell as much stuff as possible while paying as little for advertising as possible. They couldn't care less about which exact demographics buy stuff. They only care that those demographics are more or less likely to make a purchase decision as a result of seeing an ad. So yes, chicken and watermelons will get shown to black folks, and coffee, by and large, won't be. The way to "fight" this (if you feel passionate enough about the issue) is not by getting your panties in a bunch, but by eliminating the incentive: that is, by getting the particular demographic to _not_ make a particular purchase decision. Do that, and the "problem" will go away on its own.
Google actually did research on this. They've found that, counterintuitively, it's dangerous to have a "mostly" autonomous car that can yield to a human driver at any moment. People tend to underestimate how much context they're holding in their head as they are driving. Acquiring that context at a moment's notice is just not really possible, so people tend to make stupid decisions if they weren't already paying attention. So it has to be either 100% hands free, or it'll have to be sold as a glorified driver safety system. That's why the cute little self driving cars that Google uses on its campus don't have a steering wheel at all.
I actually disagree with 99% assertion. The relative importance of problems matters here. To succeed, this technology needs to be _substantially_ safer than humans _in all cases that matter_, not in all possible cases. That having been said, even with a relaxed problem statement like this, with today's technology this is a nearly insurmountable goal.