Of course they are not as developed as the US, but that's true for most countries. Cuba has a relatively high HDI, according to the UN, not the Cuban government.
This. The web is popular because it's a simple way to deploy something that works across different OSes and different devices. On the users' part, no installation isrequired, and web apps are safely sandboxed. The web is thriving because of the shortcomings of native platforms.
I think the 'don't be evil' motto was a faulty one, creating irrealistic expectations. Google was never like Twitter, their morals were always somewhat flexible. The wonderful thing about Google isn't that they do no evil, but that they also do more than enough amazing things to offset it.
Google has been making these claims for quite a while, but refuses any independent test that could back them up. For a company notorious for putting out products at a "public beta" stage, they certainly take their time with technology they claim to be having for years.
He could mean that 20% of the capacity for converting CO2 into H2O is in the fucking rainforest.
That would be photofission and would be quite amazing if plants could do that. Photosynthesis doesn't work that way. Plants only produce twice as much oxygen as the amount of carbon trapped in them. Now there is an amount of carbon that gets into the ground in forests and form coal deposits, but that is insignificant on human timescales. Rainforests are pretty much a stock resource. The only real carbon-negative forests are forestries.
It wouldn't be fair to tell the Brazilians not to cut down their forests after we cut down most of ours. What we need is a system similar to carbon credits that makes it profitable for developing countries to keep their forests.
Where did you get that bullshit from? Even if the rainforests have sequestrated all the CO2 in the atmosphere, that's just 0.04% compared to the 20% of oxygen in it. We could burn all the forests and carbon reserves without running out of oxygen. Also, forest don't produce oxygen actively, they only store carbon. Not to mention that you ignored the effect of marine life.
The research only shows that bees can sense the electric fields of other bees. We don't even know whether bees are able to control their own electric fields, claiming that they communicate with each other that way is a bit of a stretch.
I agree. An often overlooked thing in language design is that less functionality leads to more standardized code that's easier to read. When I want to use complicated languages there's already a wide selection available.
Slashdot Mirror
He is comparing propaganda to propaganda. Although truth to be told you can't play as Nazis in American shooters so it would be only fair.
Of course they are not as developed as the US, but that's true for most countries. Cuba has a relatively high HDI, according to the UN, not the Cuban government.
Mobs are uncontrollable. Once they start to rage, you won't be able to constrain them to a select few cases.
And we already know who did that. Anonymity would only protect the victims of Swartz from getting caught in the crossfire.
they would've refused to give their answers using an undefined unit of measurement.
Sure, why don't we just abandon our laws and due process and solve every problem by lynch mobs.
But China won't help you out this time.
Because many here are liberal anarchists who don't believe in law.
Closure is a technical term for variable capture, and Java8 doesn't have it.
Computing is orders of magnitude more efficient efficient than the traditional ways it replaces.
A technical solution would require redefining the IP standard.
it's made out of Lego.
This. The web is popular because it's a simple way to deploy something that works across different OSes and different devices. On the users' part, no installation isrequired, and web apps are safely sandboxed. The web is thriving because of the shortcomings of native platforms.
I've heard of one called Skype.
I think the 'don't be evil' motto was a faulty one, creating irrealistic expectations. Google was never like Twitter, their morals were always somewhat flexible. The wonderful thing about Google isn't that they do no evil, but that they also do more than enough amazing things to offset it.
Many drives are thrown out because they stop working, in which case this method doesn't help.
Google has been making these claims for quite a while, but refuses any independent test that could back them up. For a company notorious for putting out products at a "public beta" stage, they certainly take their time with technology they claim to be having for years.
He could mean that 20% of the capacity for converting CO2 into H2O is in the fucking rainforest.
That would be photofission and would be quite amazing if plants could do that. Photosynthesis doesn't work that way. Plants only produce twice as much oxygen as the amount of carbon trapped in them. Now there is an amount of carbon that gets into the ground in forests and form coal deposits, but that is insignificant on human timescales. Rainforests are pretty much a stock resource. The only real carbon-negative forests are forestries.
It wouldn't be fair to tell the Brazilians not to cut down their forests after we cut down most of ours. What we need is a system similar to carbon credits that makes it profitable for developing countries to keep their forests.
Where did you get that bullshit from? Even if the rainforests have sequestrated all the CO2 in the atmosphere, that's just 0.04% compared to the 20% of oxygen in it. We could burn all the forests and carbon reserves without running out of oxygen. Also, forest don't produce oxygen actively, they only store carbon. Not to mention that you ignored the effect of marine life.
The research only shows that bees can sense the electric fields of other bees. We don't even know whether bees are able to control their own electric fields, claiming that they communicate with each other that way is a bit of a stretch.
Fiber has a kevlar sheating which should worth something.
Apparently, these lambdas don't even form real closures, their free variables can only be final ones.
I agree. An often overlooked thing in language design is that less functionality leads to more standardized code that's easier to read. When I want to use complicated languages there's already a wide selection available.
There's a reason most scientists use the more accurate term climate change.