participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day
I wouldn't be surprised if the people forced to play "the sims" exhibited slightly more violent tendencies immediately after playing compared to GTA... that game just pisses me off.
The actual argument is pretty hard to disagree with objectively... but as you have experienced, many people (ordinary people even) are more interested in aligning or distancing themselves with a figurehead and will use straw men or outright falsehoods as a guise to their true reasoning, probably without even being aware of it. I personally attribute this kind of madness to the media crazed facebook/twitter age of politics.
Paying a few million to a single developer to keep a multi-billion dollar revenue stream from stopping dead seems like chump change.
People don't have issue with the companies being forced to pay up, the issue is with the individual collecting for substantial personal gain - it's akin to a corrupt tax man, the tax is for the people, but he's just taking it all for himself rather than slicing his pay out of it. This is why non profit organisations like the FSF or FSC should always be in charge of this method, any entity that is legally bound to appropriate the funds for the benefit of the project.
You are absolutely correct about the penalty not having to be financial, the whole purpose of GPL is to help the code grow and make sure everyone can always use it... but in the case where it must be settled financially it can also be used for the same goals by funding developer(s) to support the code - however funding a single developer millions of euros does not do that.
Seriously though... it's a shame the unavoidable negative connotations of "siding with trump" are going to be far more visible than agreeing on one of the most objective and uncontroversial arguments regarding US import duties on China, the title isn't helping.
This is basically an unsubstantiated conclusion drawn from misrepresented data.
The study suffers from a similar fallacy of generalising the ungeneralisable that various "successful people" often do when attributing success to methods which are highly subjective and circumstantial... the only difference here is is a study that generalises the opinion of 4000 "professionals" who are active members of linked-in by considering them to be a representative group of the whole - they are anything but, who the fuck has time for that shit, the real professionals are not arsing around on linked-in - those people are doing work for their employees that does not involve recruitment.
I thought one of the basic principles of bitcoin was that transactions can't be reversed?
I doubt it really ever took place in the actual bitcoin block chain since the article states they bought bitcoin worth 20 trillion... many times more than the current market cap of bitcoin, making it impossible. It's would be confined to their order system since it was reversible.
Having not used facebook in over a decade, the kinds of things happening on it now sound so alien to it's origins, in a bad way. Roll on decentralised networking.
Lets face it, the FUD spread to blur Meltdown with Spectre has been won by Intel. It's up to the non-tech crowd to evolve to not take headlines at face value. It seems you can do no wrong in PR no matter how misleading... It's not possible to shout loudly enough against it, people have already moved onto the next headline.
Tim says: to underappreciate Apple products correctly you should exclude the following list of violated principles and values:
1. Disrespect of human life through child labour
2. Disrespect of users country via corporate tax evasion
3. Disrespect of users right to repair own devices
4. Disrespect of users inteligence through denying existence of hardware flaws
5. Disrespect environment through premature, planned obsolescence
Those are childish and unrealistic ideals, you would be nothing less than a stallmanite for upholding such values (it's not about technology remember)... instead you should focus on the following product centric list in order to correctly underappreciate Apple by seeing how they are changing the world for the worst:
1. A shift away from a design ethos where form follows function (Dieter Rams) towards function following form (blind obsession with aesthetic minimalism in spite of any funcitonal issues it causes)
2. A shift back towards purely marketing driven direction (useless feature lists to please the smartphone crowd vs focus on software quality and reliability)
3. An OS that used to "just work" gradually turning into an OS that constantly pesters you about shit and gets in the way of any productivity
4. Introduction of more bugs than fixes with each new release
But, I miss the lossless DRM free no bullshit format etched on them. I've never bought any music online, most of it is low quality lossy and some even DRM.
But there must be some demand for this? I came across "Tidal" for streaming which looks promising, but is there anywhere you can actually buy lossless stuff or am I relegated to piracy in an age where everything where the whole pipeline is designed for shitty earbuds and iPhones?
the relentless use of horrible RoHS solder has greatly exacerbated the problem, because ALL lead-free solder is less "malleable" (more brittle) than solder containing Lead; so add a few dozen thermal cycles, and... it ends up affecting nearly EVERY OEM that uses the now ubiquitous BGA packages, which a lot of high-pin-count ICs are ONLY offered in.
I'd hazard a guess that this shortsighted RoHS regulation has actually increased the quantity of hazardous materials from entering the waste stream since it's increased the number of devices being binned by users. If we can find an alternative to leaded solder then great but in the meantime this is madness and benefits no one... I'm carrying on using leaded solder with my own creations because I want them to last.
what is the sum of a character that looks like a garden gate over a triangular squiggle and a character that looks like a horse kind of with two small squares over it?
Oh yay slashdot ate my fucking html entities... are you kidding. (2 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 3) + (2 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 3) = (4 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 6)
Math is fucking hard on slashdot... they should make kids do it... ya know, in case of a post apocalypse where only ASCII chars are allowed.
We don't need "built in protection" we need a "design which isn't vulnerable", if the former is truly their strategy then the analogue is anti-virus inside your CPU... You people who write headline need to stop playing into Intel PR's incredulous attitude to their own fucking design flaw. Meltdown and Spectre are not inevitable, they need to be designed out not paved over. Intel: stop treating everyone like morons or suffer the consequences.
I agree with others here that the DE is the more resource hungry consideration than the distro. I use Debian + i3wm on my MBP 5,1 and it's faster than any Apple OS that ever ran on it. I know that i3wm is probably the main reason for that, if I installed gnome3 (which i'm not entirely against) I expect It would be quite a lot slower. i3wm is the most friendly of the tiling window managers if you wanted to go down that route, once you do you tend not to go back.
The superpositions that qubits can adopt let them each help perform two calculations at once. If two qubits are quantum-mechanically linked, or entangled, they can help perform four calculations simultaneously; three qubits, eight calculations; and so on. As a result, a quantum computer with 300 qubits could perform more calculations in an instant than there are atoms in the known universe, solving certain problems much faster than classical computers. However, superpositions are extraordinarily fragile, making it difficult to work with multiple qubits.
I'm pretty sure your PC isn't going to be able to do that.
This description is really misleading when taken out of context and without understanding how you extract "the answer", it doesn't literally do N calculations at once, but rather with the right kind of computational problem you can coerce the output to "pick" the correct specific permutation through properties that they share with the others, that's the best not-very good layman explanation I can provide because I barely understand it myself and it's really hard to understand. Without the right kind of problem you will just get a random answer... much like you randomly get a single photon position position in the double slit experiment when a measurement taken and the field collapses.
Each time you add a qbit, you raise two to a higher exponent value. In this case, two raised to the 49th power yields 562,949,950,000,000 variations that can be compared at once. This technique is ideal for certain types of calculations
Be careful not to loose sight of how much emphasis should be applied to the specificity in "specific calculations"... Almost all of the computations that happen on your regular computer 99% of the time will not be sped up by quantum computing.
" This is also why we won't be seeing quantum computers in anyone's house at any point."
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977
People wont want it because they probably wont even know they are using it, it's not comparable to a normal computer in terms of it's visibility, it's more like an extra component for very specific applications. Not to downplay how amazing they are but a quantum computer doesn't magically mean it can do all traditional computing faster (it can't), it can do very specific esoteric problems much faster and has other interesting unique esoteric properties - but it's often hard to figure out how to do them. Quantum processors are more likely to be a specialised processor like a DSP or a GPU, It's easy to imagine it being used as an ASIC hardware encryption.
It's not about JavaScript because A) all the big popular frameworks are some kind of MVC, they are all about interfacing with the DOM and users, JavaScript is just what's available. B) There is a work in progress standard to better solve this problem as part of the web platform.
Also, the interpretation of these stats is flawed, it assumes new questions asked per month equates purely to popularity, but if you give it more than 2 seconds of thought you realise that there will be a saturation of common questions being asked from the release of a new framework that will die down, the initial spike is additionally due to the existing developers learning the framework, the baseline it tapers of to will be the rate of new developers taking up the framework but will be difficult to distinguish.
We all know JS MVC type frameworks come and go, they are each and experiment and a path towards learning how to do MVCs well on the web, but this analysis is just someone wanting to see what they think is true.
It says it right there on the Y axis of their graph: "% of stack overflow questions that month"... When you don't know how to X in framework Y? you google, and probably land on stack overflow if the question exists; you don't post another question. This metric doesn't equate to popularity it equates primarily to question saturation and secondly to popularity in terms of uptake (less questions asked by advanced users).
We all know JS frameworks come and go quickly compared to other languages but this analysis is the height of numerology... if you're going to do some statistics be objective.
Slashdot Mirror
participants play either Grand Theft Auto V or The Sims 3 for at least 30 minutes every day
I wouldn't be surprised if the people forced to play "the sims" exhibited slightly more violent tendencies immediately after playing compared to GTA... that game just pisses me off.
The actual argument is pretty hard to disagree with objectively... but as you have experienced, many people (ordinary people even) are more interested in aligning or distancing themselves with a figurehead and will use straw men or outright falsehoods as a guise to their true reasoning, probably without even being aware of it. I personally attribute this kind of madness to the media crazed facebook/twitter age of politics.
Paying a few million to a single developer to keep a multi-billion dollar revenue stream from stopping dead seems like chump change.
People don't have issue with the companies being forced to pay up, the issue is with the individual collecting for substantial personal gain - it's akin to a corrupt tax man, the tax is for the people, but he's just taking it all for himself rather than slicing his pay out of it. This is why non profit organisations like the FSF or FSC should always be in charge of this method, any entity that is legally bound to appropriate the funds for the benefit of the project.
You are absolutely correct about the penalty not having to be financial, the whole purpose of GPL is to help the code grow and make sure everyone can always use it... but in the case where it must be settled financially it can also be used for the same goals by funding developer(s) to support the code - however funding a single developer millions of euros does not do that.
Ya know why the English don't build computers?
They haven't figured out how to make them leak oil yet.
Yeah, we just seed designs and then outsource the grunt work to other countries... wait.
Seriously though... it's a shame the unavoidable negative connotations of "siding with trump" are going to be far more visible than agreeing on one of the most objective and uncontroversial arguments regarding US import duties on China, the title isn't helping.
This is basically an unsubstantiated conclusion drawn from misrepresented data.
The study suffers from a similar fallacy of generalising the ungeneralisable that various "successful people" often do when attributing success to methods which are highly subjective and circumstantial... the only difference here is is a study that generalises the opinion of 4000 "professionals" who are active members of linked-in by considering them to be a representative group of the whole - they are anything but, who the fuck has time for that shit, the real professionals are not arsing around on linked-in - those people are doing work for their employees that does not involve recruitment.
I thought one of the basic principles of bitcoin was that transactions can't be reversed?
I doubt it really ever took place in the actual bitcoin block chain since the article states they bought bitcoin worth 20 trillion... many times more than the current market cap of bitcoin, making it impossible. It's would be confined to their order system since it was reversible.
Having not used facebook in over a decade, the kinds of things happening on it now sound so alien to it's origins, in a bad way. Roll on decentralised networking.
Lets face it, the FUD spread to blur Meltdown with Spectre has been won by Intel. It's up to the non-tech crowd to evolve to not take headlines at face value. It seems you can do no wrong in PR no matter how misleading... It's not possible to shout loudly enough against it, people have already moved onto the next headline.
Armen
Yup, if this is "Fighting Back" then by the same definition we've had machines that "fight back" for a century already in the form of PID controllers.
Tim says: to underappreciate Apple products correctly you should exclude the following list of violated principles and values:
Those are childish and unrealistic ideals, you would be nothing less than a stallmanite for upholding such values (it's not about technology remember)... instead you should focus on the following product centric list in order to correctly underappreciate Apple by seeing how they are changing the world for the worst:
But, I miss the lossless DRM free no bullshit format etched on them. I've never bought any music online, most of it is low quality lossy and some even DRM.
But there must be some demand for this? I came across "Tidal" for streaming which looks promising, but is there anywhere you can actually buy lossless stuff or am I relegated to piracy in an age where everything where the whole pipeline is designed for shitty earbuds and iPhones?
the relentless use of horrible RoHS solder has greatly exacerbated the problem, because ALL lead-free solder is less "malleable" (more brittle) than solder containing Lead; so add a few dozen thermal cycles, and... it ends up affecting nearly EVERY OEM that uses the now ubiquitous BGA packages, which a lot of high-pin-count ICs are ONLY offered in.
I'd hazard a guess that this shortsighted RoHS regulation has actually increased the quantity of hazardous materials from entering the waste stream since it's increased the number of devices being binned by users. If we can find an alternative to leaded solder then great but in the meantime this is madness and benefits no one... I'm carrying on using leaded solder with my own creations because I want them to last.
what is the sum of a character that looks like a garden gate over a triangular squiggle and a character that looks like a horse kind of with two small squares over it?
Pah! easy: Steeplechase
Does it round up or down?
Depends on the bookie
Oh yay slashdot ate my fucking html entities... are you kidding. (2 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 3) + (2 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 3) = (4 LESS-THAN-OR-EQUAL-TO a LESS-THAN 6)
Math is fucking hard on slashdot... they should make kids do it... ya know, in case of a post apocalypse where only ASCII chars are allowed.
Oh yay slashdot ate my comparators... that was originally: (2 a < 3) + (2 a < 3) = (4 a < 6)
And 2 + 2 is 5 for large values of 2... Don't believe me?
If 2.4 rounds down to 2 then What's 2.4 + 2.4? Why it's 2.8, which clearly rounds up to 3....
How about that kind of math question?
That's just interval math, and actually the correct answer is between 4 and 6: (2 = a 3) + (2 = b 3) = (4 = x 6)
We don't need "built in protection" we need a "design which isn't vulnerable", if the former is truly their strategy then the analogue is anti-virus inside your CPU... You people who write headline need to stop playing into Intel PR's incredulous attitude to their own fucking design flaw. Meltdown and Spectre are not inevitable, they need to be designed out not paved over. Intel: stop treating everyone like morons or suffer the consequences.
I agree with others here that the DE is the more resource hungry consideration than the distro. I use Debian + i3wm on my MBP 5,1 and it's faster than any Apple OS that ever ran on it. I know that i3wm is probably the main reason for that, if I installed gnome3 (which i'm not entirely against) I expect It would be quite a lot slower. i3wm is the most friendly of the tiling window managers if you wanted to go down that route, once you do you tend not to go back.
The superpositions that qubits can adopt let them each help perform two calculations at once. If two qubits are quantum-mechanically linked, or entangled, they can help perform four calculations simultaneously; three qubits, eight calculations; and so on. As a result, a quantum computer with 300 qubits could perform more calculations in an instant than there are atoms in the known universe, solving certain problems much faster than classical computers. However, superpositions are extraordinarily fragile, making it difficult to work with multiple qubits.
I'm pretty sure your PC isn't going to be able to do that.
This description is really misleading when taken out of context and without understanding how you extract "the answer", it doesn't literally do N calculations at once, but rather with the right kind of computational problem you can coerce the output to "pick" the correct specific permutation through properties that they share with the others, that's the best not-very good layman explanation I can provide because I barely understand it myself and it's really hard to understand. Without the right kind of problem you will just get a random answer... much like you randomly get a single photon position position in the double slit experiment when a measurement taken and the field collapses.
Each time you add a qbit, you raise two to a higher exponent value. In this case, two raised to the 49th power yields 562,949,950,000,000 variations that can be compared at once. This technique is ideal for certain types of calculations
Be careful not to loose sight of how much emphasis should be applied to the specificity in "specific calculations"... Almost all of the computations that happen on your regular computer 99% of the time will not be sped up by quantum computing.
" This is also why we won't be seeing quantum computers in anyone's house at any point."
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
Ken Olsen, founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977
People wont want it because they probably wont even know they are using it, it's not comparable to a normal computer in terms of it's visibility, it's more like an extra component for very specific applications. Not to downplay how amazing they are but a quantum computer doesn't magically mean it can do all traditional computing faster (it can't), it can do very specific esoteric problems much faster and has other interesting unique esoteric properties - but it's often hard to figure out how to do them. Quantum processors are more likely to be a specialised processor like a DSP or a GPU, It's easy to imagine it being used as an ASIC hardware encryption.
It's not about JavaScript because A) all the big popular frameworks are some kind of MVC, they are all about interfacing with the DOM and users, JavaScript is just what's available. B) There is a work in progress standard to better solve this problem as part of the web platform.
Also, the interpretation of these stats is flawed, it assumes new questions asked per month equates purely to popularity, but if you give it more than 2 seconds of thought you realise that there will be a saturation of common questions being asked from the release of a new framework that will die down, the initial spike is additionally due to the existing developers learning the framework, the baseline it tapers of to will be the rate of new developers taking up the framework but will be difficult to distinguish.
We all know JS MVC type frameworks come and go, they are each and experiment and a path towards learning how to do MVCs well on the web, but this analysis is just someone wanting to see what they think is true.
It says it right there on the Y axis of their graph: "% of stack overflow questions that month"... When you don't know how to X in framework Y? you google, and probably land on stack overflow if the question exists; you don't post another question. This metric doesn't equate to popularity it equates primarily to question saturation and secondly to popularity in terms of uptake (less questions asked by advanced users).
We all know JS frameworks come and go quickly compared to other languages but this analysis is the height of numerology... if you're going to do some statistics be objective.