There are more homeless people than there are geniuses. It's simply easier to become homeless than be a genius. Out of those groups, quirkiness would have to be much much more common in geniuses than in homeless people for there to be roughly similar numbers.
There are more quirkly homeless people than quirky geniuses. We don't need to spread the myth about quirks being a fundamental particle of genius. We already have too much self-described geniuses on websites like Slashdot who are arseholes because they read a self-confirming article that many geniuses were arseholes.
And the point is we should keep making more. Not just reminisce about the old times. Yeah, it may be cool to find Doctor Who episodes in Hong Kong or Australia that were thought to have been lost, but what has finding them actually accomplished?
How nice of you to completely ignore talking about the female employees in a sexual manner right in front of them. They weren't just talking about their own sex life. Phrasing is the key, and your obvious attempt to gloss over the thing that's actually wrong shows what you really think people like you should be allowed to do.
And excluding workers from important meetings who didn't participate in the drugs is not merely laughing at them. It's actively preventing them from performing their job. And one of them was terminated for complaining about it. You obviously think it's okay to terminate people for complaining about behaviour then.
This can only ever be neutral if you straight up ignore the actual details.
there is no one machine that can beat an average human in everything he or she does
Neither can most humans. There is no such thing as an average human. Every individual human specializes, and increasingly so as they get older (or they do not improve). It is a pervasive strawman to require AIs to "beat" an average human when the same quality isn't used to judge humans.
Saving decidely doesn't grow the economy. The economy only sees money being spent. The problem with consumption tax is that it hurts low income earners more. Food is basically a fixed cost that doesn't scale at the bottom of the ladder.
You didn't even read to the end of the summary, it seems. The problem is they are not suing over the mistake made by the clinic, but that the child has the wrong genes. Suing the clinic over medical malpractice is fine, but the couple has sued for a completely different formulation of the problem.
I was sitting right next to people working on such a thing. Then their main product was bought by another company, they ended up quitting instead of being transferred, and IBM lost that expertise.
No one died on their smartphones on my street today. Therefore this trend doesn't exist. It is in fact a conspiracy pushed by the chicken little pedestrian lobby in trying to take away my God given right to have a smartphone and be reckless with it.
There's a lot of promise to stem cells, which is why I don't think government should heavily regulate stem cell RESEARCH. But this isn't research. This is people making untested claims and duping people who can not possibly be informed into paying money for shonky treatment. There's no corrective action that can reverse blindness, as I understand it.
Yeah. Let the free market solve everything! Once enough people go blind, why, these businesses will surely go down in flames because nobody will be able to find them anymore!
ClearCase started out as Rational products that got bought by IBM. Rational products just suck in both concept and implementation. IBM just snaps up companies and then screw over the developers until they leave or RA'd. Then they sell it off to companies like HCL because they didn't know what to do with the products they acquired.
Yeah? And if you've been doing Python full time, you'd also remember how to make a class, make a generator, do list comprehensions etc etc etc. Testing someone for "length of string" is a MEANINGLESS test that's a waste of time. Testing trivia is pointless and makes you look like a tool who doesn't know how to create meaningful tests.
You've proven my point that you don't really understand what you're testing for. You THINK you're testing for liars, but you're not. There are much better ways to test for liars that aren't completely irrelevant. It's like people who write classes, then writes public setters and getters for everything, and writes stupid tests to test that they work, as though that in any way assures quality.
Just goes to show most programmers are horrible testers and don't know what actually constitutes a good test or not.
I find premature automation to be just as bad as premature optimization. My biggest peeve about testing is not being able to run tests on their own without having to install a whole bunch of stuff first. And then you get thousands of meaningless tests that are only there to make the numbers look good but which don't actually provide any quality assurance.
I don't get the impression most interviewers know what they are looking for. Just like with software, testing in general is hard. You have to understand what you're really testing for and whether your tests actually tests for those qualities and rules out anti-qualities.
I find it hard to take anyone who thinks these coding tests really test for anything.
Slashdot Mirror
There are more homeless people than there are geniuses. It's simply easier to become homeless than be a genius. Out of those groups, quirkiness would have to be much much more common in geniuses than in homeless people for there to be roughly similar numbers.
There are more quirkly homeless people than quirky geniuses. We don't need to spread the myth about quirks being a fundamental particle of genius. We already have too much self-described geniuses on websites like Slashdot who are arseholes because they read a self-confirming article that many geniuses were arseholes.
If their dockless model does not pass as innovation to you, then why did an American startup copy it?
And the point is we should keep making more. Not just reminisce about the old times. Yeah, it may be cool to find Doctor Who episodes in Hong Kong or Australia that were thought to have been lost, but what has finding them actually accomplished?
Oh no, you were assaulted. That gives you all the right to dismiss their assault.
So? The article is reporting what is in the legal action. That is what it claims. It is the job of the article to report on what is being claimed.
How nice of you to completely ignore talking about the female employees in a sexual manner right in front of them. They weren't just talking about their own sex life. Phrasing is the key, and your obvious attempt to gloss over the thing that's actually wrong shows what you really think people like you should be allowed to do.
And excluding workers from important meetings who didn't participate in the drugs is not merely laughing at them. It's actively preventing them from performing their job. And one of them was terminated for complaining about it. You obviously think it's okay to terminate people for complaining about behaviour then.
This can only ever be neutral if you straight up ignore the actual details.
there is no one machine that can beat an average human in everything he or she does
Neither can most humans. There is no such thing as an average human. Every individual human specializes, and increasingly so as they get older (or they do not improve). It is a pervasive strawman to require AIs to "beat" an average human when the same quality isn't used to judge humans.
Saving decidely doesn't grow the economy. The economy only sees money being spent. The problem with consumption tax is that it hurts low income earners more. Food is basically a fixed cost that doesn't scale at the bottom of the ladder.
Stallman seems like a radical extremist that advocates blowing up parlament
No, he doesn't.
You didn't even read to the end of the summary, it seems. The problem is they are not suing over the mistake made by the clinic, but that the child has the wrong genes. Suing the clinic over medical malpractice is fine, but the couple has sued for a completely different formulation of the problem.
I was sitting right next to people working on such a thing. Then their main product was bought by another company, they ended up quitting instead of being transferred, and IBM lost that expertise.
Dark matter makes up about a quarter of the universe, but it is difficult for us to detect it because it doesn’t reflect or shine light.
Or block light. That is the more important property I would think.
Which court wouldn't routinely rule in favour of their own country or union's companies?
No one died on their smartphones on my street today. Therefore this trend doesn't exist. It is in fact a conspiracy pushed by the chicken little pedestrian lobby in trying to take away my God given right to have a smartphone and be reckless with it.
I was going to say "that's money at work", but that would be redundant.
Just mandate that laws are written in an executable language, like Python or Scheme, and then it must go through rigorous testing.
There's a lot of promise to stem cells, which is why I don't think government should heavily regulate stem cell RESEARCH. But this isn't research. This is people making untested claims and duping people who can not possibly be informed into paying money for shonky treatment. There's no corrective action that can reverse blindness, as I understand it.
Yeah. Let the free market solve everything! Once enough people go blind, why, these businesses will surely go down in flames because nobody will be able to find them anymore!
ClearCase started out as Rational products that got bought by IBM. Rational products just suck in both concept and implementation. IBM just snaps up companies and then screw over the developers until they leave or RA'd. Then they sell it off to companies like HCL because they didn't know what to do with the products they acquired.
Yeah? And if you've been doing Python full time, you'd also remember how to make a class, make a generator, do list comprehensions etc etc etc. Testing someone for "length of string" is a MEANINGLESS test that's a waste of time. Testing trivia is pointless and makes you look like a tool who doesn't know how to create meaningful tests.
You've proven my point that you don't really understand what you're testing for. You THINK you're testing for liars, but you're not. There are much better ways to test for liars that aren't completely irrelevant. It's like people who write classes, then writes public setters and getters for everything, and writes stupid tests to test that they work, as though that in any way assures quality.
Just goes to show most programmers are horrible testers and don't know what actually constitutes a good test or not.
I find premature automation to be just as bad as premature optimization. My biggest peeve about testing is not being able to run tests on their own without having to install a whole bunch of stuff first. And then you get thousands of meaningless tests that are only there to make the numbers look good but which don't actually provide any quality assurance.
I don't get the impression most interviewers know what they are looking for. Just like with software, testing in general is hard. You have to understand what you're really testing for and whether your tests actually tests for those qualities and rules out anti-qualities.
I find it hard to take anyone who thinks these coding tests really test for anything.
And how many vulnerabilities in closed-source software have you compared it with?
Where are they getting snippets from? To me, this just makes GPL'ing my code much more attractive.