Not only this but industrialized food is probably better than whatever your robotic chef could come up with. Industrial food has a bad reputation because most people think about the cheap junk food stuff but high quality also exist. Some restaurants serve this and you probably didn't notice it because it was served in a nice plate and it was actually good. While the industry won't have the improvisation skills of a good chef, it is unmatched in accuracy and consistency thanks to a rigorous control of the ingredients. With a robo-chef, you have the worst of both worlds : limited accuracy and no creativity.
There are two different actors. The first was in for the ransom and stopped after being paid. The second uses a much more advanced attack, has unknown motives, and may have chosen to strike at the same time as an attempt to put the blame on the first group.
They are basically renting 300 sq-ft apartments with a nice common room. All the rest is bullshit. How it will work will depend entirely on the rent price.
They are trying to push some "interesting" concept, but in the end it doesn't matter. What matter are the basics : price, size, location,...
Come one, you only need to know maybe a hundred English words and no grammar to understand what mnemonics are about. In fact, non-natives may have a slight advantage because their smaller and more specialized vocabulary may reduce the risks of confusion. I am not a native speaker and language was never a problem for understanding mnemonics. If there is a problem, it is in the details : strings or numbers, signed or unsigned, strict or may be equal, precedence rules,...
Speculative mining may continue long after the immediate returns are greatly outweighed by the energy costs because the value of bitcoins can be expected to rise; investing now with apparent losses may be profitable in the long term.
This may affect the sales of ASIC mining rigs but not the energy cost. To put it simply, why would I spend $500 of electricity mining a Bitcoin when I can buy one on the market for $300?
Not to mention the ever-growing blockchains are wasteful by their very existence.
The ever-growing blockchain is a bit wasteful yes. However, Satoshi showed in his paper that it isn't that bad. Also, there is a way for small actors not to have a copy of the whole blockchain.
But at a very high cost. The only way to create bitcoins is to waste energy. Worse, the amount of energy that must be wasted to create new bitcoins increases over time.
It doesn't necessarily increase over time, it may also decrease. Bitcoin mining is a competition : the more they are, the harder it is, the less they are, the easier it is. Because of this, the worst case scenario, energy wise, is that the reward for mining is equal to the energy cost. It means that the energy cost for a new bitcoin will follow its valuation, until all possible bitcoins are mined. It won't be a major problem unless there is a major surge in bitcoin value well before we reach this maximum. And if it is, there is always the solution of lowering the reward, no need for a next-gen digital currency. Transaction fees can be dealt with the same way.
Interestingly, the original meaning of "art" included engineering as well as craft and practical science. What we refer as art today is actually "fine art" which deals with aesthetics. In french, this meaning of "art" can still be seen, for example in the word "artisan" which means "skilled craftsman". In construction "ouvrage d'art" are structures like bridges or tunnels that require a high level of engineering. Also "Arts et Metiers" is one of the top engineering schools in France.
Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming" probably uses "art" in the original sense too, so the meaning would be "the techniques of the computer programmer", and this is exactly what these books are about.
So maybe computer programmers are not engineers, but they are both artists.
Sure. But is it going to slow down or come screeching to a halt when some dumb cat or dog runs out into the road, and cause the vehicle behind it to rear-end it
It is going to stop to a halt, which shouldn't be a problem for the car behind it if safety distances are observed. And if the car behind is an autonomous car or have some kind of assistance like some today's cars, it may be even less of a problem.
And what about a xerox copy of the book? I remember at school : most of us bought copies of textbooks from a shady copy shop for about the same price as a paperback novel. Sometimes the copies were actually better than the real deal for studying because of the format they were printed on. And before you ask, then yes, it was commercial scale piracy. But it shows that you don't need eBooks to counter the extortion.
White skin is bad for you, in that it increases skin cancer. Light colored eyes are bad for you as well, as you more quickly lose your sight in old age. Yet these characteristics have been strongly preserved. There must be a reason for that.
Yes, that's called vitamin D. UV light do two things to the skin : damage it, which is bad, and give vitamin D, which is good. You can't separate the two. As a result, people from the north, where there is very little sunlight especially during the winter, have light skin as a way to get as much vitamin D as possible, whereas people from near the tropics where there is plenty of sunlight have dark skin as a natural sunscreen to prevent UV-related skin damage. The eye color is related to the skin color because melanin is what makes both skin and eyes dark.
Another thing is 80 year life spans are a new thing. Traits that may prove an advantage passed 50 didn't matter that much from an evolutionary point of view when few people even got to that age, and if they could, probably didn't reproduce passed it.
So, human skin color determines other characteristics?
Usually not, but it often correlates with other characteristics. For example, white skin tend to correlate with long nose although AFAIK they are completely separate traits. There are other indisputable correlations between skin color and other biological traits. So I don't think it is much of a stretch to assume that there are correlations with higher functions too. Interracial procreation can blur these differences but we need both a change of mindset and a few generations to get there. Sexual preference still goes towards the same race group.
Culture matters too, but guess what, there are also correlations between culture and skin color too, and despite all the good talk about the "melting pot", the line may be a little bit blurry but it is still there.
Oh and sorry for beating the dead horse but you don't believe that correlation implies causation, do you?
Indeed but posting sensitive data unencrypted is even worse and the browser won't say anything about it. The problem is that the browser has no simple way of knowing if the site is sensitive or not. The best it can do is to tell you clearly about the level of security so that you can react accordingly. "Dangerous" would be "worse that unencrypted" and should be reserved for cases where an attack is strongly suspected, cases where the error is unlikely to be simply the result of poor maintenance (outdated) or not wanting to deal with certificate authorities (self-signed). Also note that the examples I gave are not necessarily the best. The true conditions should be determined by actual data. But, I sometimes see myself going to the http version of a (non sensitive) site to avoid the warning, that's retarded and browsers shouldn't encourage this behavior. Also, wanting to visit a broken https site once doesn't mean I want to add an exception forever.
It's fine rejecting insecure certificates but sometimes, I'd rather have browsers get their priorities in order. If you go on a SSL website that uses a self-signed certificate or use a slightly outdated one, you are presented with a scary warning page with multiple clicks needed to get to it. However, plain HTTP goes right through even though it is less secure than SSL with any bogus certificate.
Instead of a ban, I'm all for a rating system, like : - Strong : everything OK, strong crypto - Medium : slightly outdated, weaker crypto (SHA-1 could be on this level) - Weak : self-signed, completely outdated - None : HTTP - Dangerous : revoked, mismatched certificate, suspect behavior (such as a decrease in security from last visit) Only the "dangerous" category should trigger a warning, for the other categories, a different "lock" icon should be sufficient. Like the crossed-out "https" in Google Chrome.
The call of Cthulhu is all about avoiding combat, avoiding everything in fact. In this game, fighting usually means death, just entering a potential combat situation may be enough to drive you mad.
The banking system is broken in Japan. This combined with low crime rates favor cash use. It isn't that bad actually. And you can now find ATMs in many convenience stores, which are open 24/7. Most accept Visa and Mastercard now. As for Christmas, one must understand that it is not part of the Japanese culture, it is no more important to them than Grandmother's day. Businesses like KFC took it and made it info some kind of a commercial remake of St Valentine's Day.
In fact GP is write in the sense that if you make completely random predictions, some of them will necessarily turn out right. Being always wrong is the same as being always right about things that won't happen and it is impossible without some supernatural powers. Big or small things are no different.
And if you didn't find any economist in 1915 predicting 2015 economy, is is because you didn't look hard enough or because all evidence was destroyed. Of course "online technology" wasn't even a word back then so we need to find a 1915 equivalent. But I would be extremely surprised if no one could pull something as simple as "growing service sector, decline in manufacturing, focus on communication and information" out for their ass.
Up to this point, I suspect all car manufacturers to cheat on emissions, except Tesla, maybe. It's like in some sports where all world-class athletes use performance enhancing drugs in order to meet some naturally unrealistic goal.
Compiler warnings wouldn't have helped in the case of stagefright bugs (looking at a few patches). Even cppcheck was silent.
As for fuzzing, Google made its own fuzzers: bunny-the-fuzzer followed by american-fuzzy-lop. The first one was started in 2007, at about the same time Android 1.0 came out. So Google was obviously no stranger to the concept of fuzz-testing.
Why did the bugs slipped by? One can only guess. Maybe the stagefright team was a bit rushed and didn't do all formal testing required, maybe the bugs really were hard to find, maybe they focused on optimization rather than safety (media libraries typically require efficient code), maybe their test environment was badly configured,... so many possibilities.
Actually, I don't mind working with people who rant often, as long as they have good reason to do so. In fact I'd rather work with people yelling at me about how shitty my code is and telling me why than a whole pasture of cows mooing about how good I am no matter what I do.
Go enforces a certain cording style, has rules regarding what you should use and what you shouldn't use and now even specifies how you should behave. Such uniformity makes sense if you have a company with well defined goals and want to promote teamwork. So yeah, it is very good for Google : they make a language the suits their needs, with rules that matches their company policies. As for the outside world, then yes, for me it is a no-go. Putting rules beside what's necessary for compilers to work is a great way to make sure that the language won't be used for anything that wasn't intended while offering no guarantee of the opposite. Maybe at some point, some people will take Go, say "fork you" to Google and start using it as they see fit. In the same way that Google said "fork you" to Sun/Oracle about Java for Android.
Does it mean that if it shatters for any reason, I get my money back, or, at least a free repair? For me that would be a reasonable assumption. However we've seen many waterproof phones where water damage wasn't covered by the warranty.
And why should I wipe my backside if a robot can do it? Yes I am lazy, laziness is progress. Should I call you lazy because you are not hunting the meat you are eating (or grow your own vegetables, or carry your own water, or...)? This doesn't mean that we should be lazy for everything, we can still have hobbies or do sports, but if robots can do my chores, that's perfect for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only this but industrialized food is probably better than whatever your robotic chef could come up with.
Industrial food has a bad reputation because most people think about the cheap junk food stuff but high quality also exist. Some restaurants serve this and you probably didn't notice it because it was served in a nice plate and it was actually good.
While the industry won't have the improvisation skills of a good chef, it is unmatched in accuracy and consistency thanks to a rigorous control of the ingredients. With a robo-chef, you have the worst of both worlds : limited accuracy and no creativity.
There are two different actors. The first was in for the ransom and stopped after being paid.
The second uses a much more advanced attack, has unknown motives, and may have chosen to strike at the same time as an attempt to put the blame on the first group.
They are basically renting 300 sq-ft apartments with a nice common room. All the rest is bullshit.
How it will work will depend entirely on the rent price.
They are trying to push some "interesting" concept, but in the end it doesn't matter. What matter are the basics : price, size, location, ...
Come one, you only need to know maybe a hundred English words and no grammar to understand what mnemonics are about. In fact, non-natives may have a slight advantage because their smaller and more specialized vocabulary may reduce the risks of confusion. ...
I am not a native speaker and language was never a problem for understanding mnemonics. If there is a problem, it is in the details : strings or numbers, signed or unsigned, strict or may be equal, precedence rules,
Speculative mining may continue long after the immediate returns are greatly outweighed by the energy costs because the value of bitcoins can be expected to rise; investing now with apparent losses may be profitable in the long term.
This may affect the sales of ASIC mining rigs but not the energy cost. To put it simply, why would I spend $500 of electricity mining a Bitcoin when I can buy one on the market for $300?
Not to mention the ever-growing blockchains are wasteful by their very existence.
The ever-growing blockchain is a bit wasteful yes. However, Satoshi showed in his paper that it isn't that bad. Also, there is a way for small actors not to have a copy of the whole blockchain.
But at a very high cost. The only way to create bitcoins is to waste energy. Worse, the amount of energy that must be wasted to create new bitcoins increases over time.
It doesn't necessarily increase over time, it may also decrease.
Bitcoin mining is a competition : the more they are, the harder it is, the less they are, the easier it is. Because of this, the worst case scenario, energy wise, is that the reward for mining is equal to the energy cost. It means that the energy cost for a new bitcoin will follow its valuation, until all possible bitcoins are mined. It won't be a major problem unless there is a major surge in bitcoin value well before we reach this maximum.
And if it is, there is always the solution of lowering the reward, no need for a next-gen digital currency. Transaction fees can be dealt with the same way.
That's for the Nobel prize in economics, not for the peace prize.
Interestingly, the original meaning of "art" included engineering as well as craft and practical science. What we refer as art today is actually "fine art" which deals with aesthetics.
In french, this meaning of "art" can still be seen, for example in the word "artisan" which means "skilled craftsman". In construction "ouvrage d'art" are structures like bridges or tunnels that require a high level of engineering. Also "Arts et Metiers" is one of the top engineering schools in France.
Knuth's "The Art of Computer Programming" probably uses "art" in the original sense too, so the meaning would be "the techniques of the computer programmer", and this is exactly what these books are about.
So maybe computer programmers are not engineers, but they are both artists.
AFAIK, backers got their rewards. That's much better than many other projects.
Sure. But is it going to slow down or come screeching to a halt when some dumb cat or dog runs out into the road, and cause the vehicle behind it to rear-end it
It is going to stop to a halt, which shouldn't be a problem for the car behind it if safety distances are observed. And if the car behind is an autonomous car or have some kind of assistance like some today's cars, it may be even less of a problem.
And what about a xerox copy of the book?
I remember at school : most of us bought copies of textbooks from a shady copy shop for about the same price as a paperback novel. Sometimes the copies were actually better than the real deal for studying because of the format they were printed on.
And before you ask, then yes, it was commercial scale piracy. But it shows that you don't need eBooks to counter the extortion.
White skin is bad for you, in that it increases skin cancer. Light colored eyes are bad for you as well, as you more quickly lose your sight in old age. Yet these characteristics have been strongly preserved. There must be a reason for that.
Yes, that's called vitamin D.
UV light do two things to the skin : damage it, which is bad, and give vitamin D, which is good. You can't separate the two.
As a result, people from the north, where there is very little sunlight especially during the winter, have light skin as a way to get as much vitamin D as possible, whereas people from near the tropics where there is plenty of sunlight have dark skin as a natural sunscreen to prevent UV-related skin damage.
The eye color is related to the skin color because melanin is what makes both skin and eyes dark.
Another thing is 80 year life spans are a new thing. Traits that may prove an advantage passed 50 didn't matter that much from an evolutionary point of view when few people even got to that age, and if they could, probably didn't reproduce passed it.
So, human skin color determines other characteristics?
Usually not, but it often correlates with other characteristics. For example, white skin tend to correlate with long nose although AFAIK they are completely separate traits. There are other indisputable correlations between skin color and other biological traits. So I don't think it is much of a stretch to assume that there are correlations with higher functions too.
Interracial procreation can blur these differences but we need both a change of mindset and a few generations to get there. Sexual preference still goes towards the same race group.
Culture matters too, but guess what, there are also correlations between culture and skin color too, and despite all the good talk about the "melting pot", the line may be a little bit blurry but it is still there.
Oh and sorry for beating the dead horse but you don't believe that correlation implies causation, do you?
Indeed but posting sensitive data unencrypted is even worse and the browser won't say anything about it.
The problem is that the browser has no simple way of knowing if the site is sensitive or not. The best it can do is to tell you clearly about the level of security so that you can react accordingly.
"Dangerous" would be "worse that unencrypted" and should be reserved for cases where an attack is strongly suspected, cases where the error is unlikely to be simply the result of poor maintenance (outdated) or not wanting to deal with certificate authorities (self-signed).
Also note that the examples I gave are not necessarily the best. The true conditions should be determined by actual data. But, I sometimes see myself going to the http version of a (non sensitive) site to avoid the warning, that's retarded and browsers shouldn't encourage this behavior. Also, wanting to visit a broken https site once doesn't mean I want to add an exception forever.
It's fine rejecting insecure certificates but sometimes, I'd rather have browsers get their priorities in order.
If you go on a SSL website that uses a self-signed certificate or use a slightly outdated one, you are presented with a scary warning page with multiple clicks needed to get to it. However, plain HTTP goes right through even though it is less secure than SSL with any bogus certificate.
Instead of a ban, I'm all for a rating system, like :
- Strong : everything OK, strong crypto
- Medium : slightly outdated, weaker crypto (SHA-1 could be on this level)
- Weak : self-signed, completely outdated
- None : HTTP
- Dangerous : revoked, mismatched certificate, suspect behavior (such as a decrease in security from last visit)
Only the "dangerous" category should trigger a warning, for the other categories, a different "lock" icon should be sufficient. Like the crossed-out "https" in Google Chrome.
The call of Cthulhu is all about avoiding combat, avoiding everything in fact. In this game, fighting usually means death, just entering a potential combat situation may be enough to drive you mad.
The banking system is broken in Japan. This combined with low crime rates favor cash use. It isn't that bad actually. And you can now find ATMs in many convenience stores, which are open 24/7. Most accept Visa and Mastercard now.
As for Christmas, one must understand that it is not part of the Japanese culture, it is no more important to them than Grandmother's day. Businesses like KFC took it and made it info some kind of a commercial remake of St Valentine's Day.
In fact GP is write in the sense that if you make completely random predictions, some of them will necessarily turn out right. Being always wrong is the same as being always right about things that won't happen and it is impossible without some supernatural powers. Big or small things are no different.
And if you didn't find any economist in 1915 predicting 2015 economy, is is because you didn't look hard enough or because all evidence was destroyed. Of course "online technology" wasn't even a word back then so we need to find a 1915 equivalent. But I would be extremely surprised if no one could pull something as simple as "growing service sector, decline in manufacturing, focus on communication and information" out for their ass.
Up to this point, I suspect all car manufacturers to cheat on emissions, except Tesla, maybe.
It's like in some sports where all world-class athletes use performance enhancing drugs in order to meet some naturally unrealistic goal.
Compiler warnings wouldn't have helped in the case of stagefright bugs (looking at a few patches). Even cppcheck was silent.
As for fuzzing, Google made its own fuzzers: bunny-the-fuzzer followed by american-fuzzy-lop. The first one was started in 2007, at about the same time Android 1.0 came out. So Google was obviously no stranger to the concept of fuzz-testing.
Why did the bugs slipped by? One can only guess. Maybe the stagefright team was a bit rushed and didn't do all formal testing required, maybe the bugs really were hard to find, maybe they focused on optimization rather than safety (media libraries typically require efficient code), maybe their test environment was badly configured, ... so many possibilities.
This would be for Donald Knuth. Just like $2.56 is one hexadecimal dollar, 256 years is one hexadecimal century.
This is someone you wouldn't want to work for.
Actually, I don't mind working with people who rant often, as long as they have good reason to do so.
In fact I'd rather work with people yelling at me about how shitty my code is and telling me why than a whole pasture of cows mooing about how good I am no matter what I do.
Go enforces a certain cording style, has rules regarding what you should use and what you shouldn't use and now even specifies how you should behave.
Such uniformity makes sense if you have a company with well defined goals and want to promote teamwork. So yeah, it is very good for Google : they make a language the suits their needs, with rules that matches their company policies.
As for the outside world, then yes, for me it is a no-go. Putting rules beside what's necessary for compilers to work is a great way to make sure that the language won't be used for anything that wasn't intended while offering no guarantee of the opposite.
Maybe at some point, some people will take Go, say "fork you" to Google and start using it as they see fit. In the same way that Google said "fork you" to Sun/Oracle about Java for Android.
Does it mean that if it shatters for any reason, I get my money back, or, at least a free repair?
For me that would be a reasonable assumption. However we've seen many waterproof phones where water damage wasn't covered by the warranty.
And why should I wipe my backside if a robot can do it? Yes I am lazy, laziness is progress. Should I call you lazy because you are not hunting the meat you are eating (or grow your own vegetables, or carry your own water, or...)?
This doesn't mean that we should be lazy for everything, we can still have hobbies or do sports, but if robots can do my chores, that's perfect for me.