Please show* how flying cars would cause the oceans to boil.
(* hint: you can't and they wouldn't. Not that anyone claims that all normal cars would ever be replaced by flying "cars" (really personal VTOL aircraft) )
No. Stop spreading bullshit you have no fucking idea about. There's no chance in hell that Turkey will be able to join the EU and the chance is decreasing rapidly.
Even when there were talks (a long time ago) Turkey would have to change their system a lot to even be able to ask for a membership. Examples: It is forbidden to insult Ataturk. It is forbidden to talk about the internationally recognized and well documented Armenian genocide. Human rights violations. Too many to list. Trying to control media including the freedom of the press. Multiple instances of trying to influence Turks living abroad in illegal ways, threats, spionage etc.
That is already known, research in vitrification of larger organs is commonly seen as the way forward.
The people believing in resurrection of frozen dead humans (and human parts) know that we have no current technology that can repair the known damages, if pressed they will admit that there is a huge chance that it isn't physically possible to do. Remember that the frozen ex-humans have to be pronounced dead before the long freezing process begins - it is likely that enough tissue have been destroyed than nothing of the persons memory or personality would remain even if it would be possible to revive a brain.
And Alcor have already commented on this ludicrous idea.
I haven't programmed much in COBOL (too verbose) but have seen examples where it really shines - a few (well relatively - it's COBOL after all) lines of code to do e.g. reports compared to a lot of code C++, even when using relatively obscure libraries to do the heavy lifting.
It is old, damned verbose, not a general language, not a low-level language but it is suited for the tasks it was designed for.
Then you'd be rich by suing companies that loose money in their business systems. But you aren't, money aren't lost/stolen by code and the lie is yours.
Financial rules are very strict. There's a reason why IBM spent a lot of effort supporting decimal floating point in hardware, it is more suited for financial rounding etc. Think they did it for fun? Think they did it to help javscript-class programmers that can't comprehend standard floating point arithmetics? Nope.
So who are "us" and who are the Windows 10 users that are shocked? What are they shocked about? What excuses are they making? What nightmares are hidden in the dark bowels of the dreaded Windows world?
Either you are imagining things or posting to the wrong place...
Having read TFA this is clearly a violation however not by Oregon - here we have a man that: . Works as an engineer (which is okay) while claiming to be an engineer (which he is _not_). . He repeatedly claims to be an engineer without being one.
This is exactly why these kinds of rules exist - if the man in question don't know the easy rule to not call himself something that requires a specific set of exams, what other rules are he ignorant about? The rules for electrical engineering have huge differences between the US and European countries!
Bullshit. Being able to call oneself a medical doctor in one country doesn't mean one can do the same (legally) in another country. The same applies to the engineer title and people _do_ know that.
Now I'd think this is a bad way to handle the situation _but_ it is completely valid.
1) You would be fine with people going around claiming to be medical doctors too? Same thing - claiming to be an engineer while not being one is making a claim to have competence that isn't verified _and_ can put people at risk.
2) Irrelevant. One can do engineering work without being an engineer. This is really basic logic.
3) Nobody did! Claiming to be an engineer is (as many other professional titles) restricted in most of the world - and for good reasons. Applying math and physics have no restrictions and claiming somebody did is a blatant lie.
That text doesn't really apply to modern programming practices (with modern defined as ~70's forward). Go to statements are mostly used for exception handling and breaking out of nested loops, for those uses they are hard to replace in a good way. The result of removing them will almost always be more verbose and harder to read.
I think you underestimate the skills of a good communicator and I assume that being employed as a science writer at Oak Ridge she is indeed a good communicator - otherwise they'd have hired someone else. It is also likely* the scientists have read not only the finished text but also in progress versions and have corrected any wrong usage of words and descriptions. Because that's part of being a good tech writer.
(* I have a tendency to use weak terms read this as: almost certainly 100% sure)
Over 100 papers were allegedly improperly reviewed in this one journal alone. The only assumption we can realistically make is that this problem is far more widespread than we may believe.
No that's what _you_ can make. However your understanding of logic and science is obviously lacking. The evidence doesn't support your conclusion.
We'd like to trust research scientists. They're considered some of the most intelligent, educated, and trustworthy people around. But after incidents like this, we can't help but have many questions and lots of doubt.
Reasonable people expect them to be people. Anti-scientist idiots paint them as greedy lying bastards that want to turn people from God. Very few ordinary people have your idea of angels in flesh...
In fact, if we're truly practicing anything resembling science, we can have only one hypothesis in this situation: all peer-reviewed research may have been affected by faulty peer review processes.
That's not even remotely related to being scientific. Using the same train of thoughts would lead to the conclusion that because homosexual behavior is widespread in nature (fact) not only are homosexuality natural as occurring in nature without external forcing factors (fact) but all animals are homosexual. Instead the logical conclusion is that homosexuality exists, is natural but _not_ the only (nor the most common) sexual orientation.
Until proven otherwise, I think we'll have to take any and all academic research with a really big grain of salt.
Bullshit. First of all maybe you should note that the research itself haven't been disproved (yet at least) second maybe you should compare the amount of research done with the the amount of known faulty peer reviews. Or your "logic" would say that because there are fake dollar bills around all dollar bills should be taken "with a really big grain of salt".
Strangely those that use that argument tend to ignore the case of very drunk guys hooking up with very drunk gals and having sex (the standard). Do they then rape each other?
I actually did wonder if they are talking about software engineers (who should be able to code - but maybe not in the test language without learning it first) or computer engineers (who really can't be expected to be programmers). Bad article with little information.
A moron that earns money by selling the test the article is about. But I agree with you, even skilled programmers make trivial errors that a compiler will complain about - in the real world they fix it in a few seconds, depending on how the test is designed that may not be possible.
First this is a claim about a proprietary test from a company earning money from it, information about what it actually does is not available without paying AFAIK.
Also I've read here and elsewhere how new employees can't code no matter where they come from or graduated. Some even claim that almost everyone interviewed didn't even have basic skills.
That's what science is about - quantifying reality in order to model it. Saying "everyone knows that X is true" is (even if "everyone" indeed think so - seldom the case) doesn't verify that X is true and if X is true under what circumstances that isn't true etc.
However the brilliant text you quoted isn't even something obvious, dreams can cause very complex patterns.
Really? Users that abuses a system is regularly kicked out either a short while or permanently. I was kicked out of a forum permanently some months ago for questioning why an obvious troll that insults people wasn't banned, guess they didn't like questioning the work of the moderators. Why do I mention this? Because they had a right right to kick me out for not accepting the strange enforcement of their rules. Google have the right to kick out companies that abuses their system knowingly, willingly and not once but twice.
IMHO the behavior of Burger King ensures that they have the right to be forgotten;)
Slashdot Mirror
Please show* how flying cars would cause the oceans to boil.
(* hint: you can't and they wouldn't. Not that anyone claims that all normal cars would ever be replaced by flying "cars" (really personal VTOL aircraft) )
No. Stop spreading bullshit you have no fucking idea about. There's no chance in hell that Turkey will be able to join the EU and the chance is decreasing rapidly.
Even when there were talks (a long time ago) Turkey would have to change their system a lot to even be able to ask for a membership. Examples:
It is forbidden to insult Ataturk.
It is forbidden to talk about the internationally recognized and well documented Armenian genocide.
Human rights violations. Too many to list.
Trying to control media including the freedom of the press.
Multiple instances of trying to influence Turks living abroad in illegal ways, threats, spionage etc.
That is already known, research in vitrification of larger organs is commonly seen as the way forward.
The people believing in resurrection of frozen dead humans (and human parts) know that we have no current technology that can repair the known damages, if pressed they will admit that there is a huge chance that it isn't physically possible to do. Remember that the frozen ex-humans have to be pronounced dead before the long freezing process begins - it is likely that enough tissue have been destroyed than nothing of the persons memory or personality would remain even if it would be possible to revive a brain.
And Alcor have already commented on this ludicrous idea.
I haven't programmed much in COBOL (too verbose) but have seen examples where it really shines - a few (well relatively - it's COBOL after all) lines of code to do e.g. reports compared to a lot of code C++, even when using relatively obscure libraries to do the heavy lifting.
It is old, damned verbose, not a general language, not a low-level language but it is suited for the tasks it was designed for.
Then you'd be rich by suing companies that loose money in their business systems. But you aren't, money aren't lost/stolen by code and the lie is yours.
Financial rules are very strict. There's a reason why IBM spent a lot of effort supporting decimal floating point in hardware, it is more suited for financial rounding etc. Think they did it for fun? Think they did it to help javscript-class programmers that can't comprehend standard floating point arithmetics? Nope.
Like COBOL?
So who are "us" and who are the Windows 10 users that are shocked? What are they shocked about? What excuses are they making? What nightmares are hidden in the dark bowels of the dreaded Windows world?
Either you are imagining things or posting to the wrong place...
Having read TFA this is clearly a violation however not by Oregon - here we have a man that:
. Works as an engineer (which is okay) while claiming to be an engineer (which he is _not_).
. He repeatedly claims to be an engineer without being one.
This is exactly why these kinds of rules exist - if the man in question don't know the easy rule to not call himself something that requires a specific set of exams, what other rules are he ignorant about? The rules for electrical engineering have huge differences between the US and European countries!
Bullshit. Being able to call oneself a medical doctor in one country doesn't mean one can do the same (legally) in another country. The same applies to the engineer title and people _do_ know that.
Now I'd think this is a bad way to handle the situation _but_ it is completely valid.
1) You would be fine with people going around claiming to be medical doctors too? Same thing - claiming to be an engineer while not being one is making a claim to have competence that isn't verified _and_ can put people at risk.
2) Irrelevant. One can do engineering work without being an engineer. This is really basic logic.
3) Nobody did! Claiming to be an engineer is (as many other professional titles) restricted in most of the world - and for good reasons. Applying math and physics have no restrictions and claiming somebody did is a blatant lie.
Plastics aren't one substance - it is a description of a huge and diverse family of materials with some common features.
That text doesn't really apply to modern programming practices (with modern defined as ~70's forward). Go to statements are mostly used for exception handling and breaking out of nested loops, for those uses they are hard to replace in a good way. The result of removing them will almost always be more verbose and harder to read.
I think you underestimate the skills of a good communicator and I assume that being employed as a science writer at Oak Ridge she is indeed a good communicator - otherwise they'd have hired someone else. It is also likely* the scientists have read not only the finished text but also in progress versions and have corrected any wrong usage of words and descriptions. Because that's part of being a good tech writer.
(* I have a tendency to use weak terms read this as: almost certainly 100% sure)
I guess you don't believe in gravity either?
(snip)
Over 100 papers were allegedly improperly reviewed in this one journal alone. The only assumption we can realistically make is that this problem is far more widespread than we may believe.
No that's what _you_ can make. However your understanding of logic and science is obviously lacking. The evidence doesn't support your conclusion.
We'd like to trust research scientists. They're considered some of the most intelligent, educated, and trustworthy people around. But after incidents like this, we can't help but have many questions and lots of doubt.
Reasonable people expect them to be people. Anti-scientist idiots paint them as greedy lying bastards that want to turn people from God. Very few ordinary people have your idea of angels in flesh...
In fact, if we're truly practicing anything resembling science, we can have only one hypothesis in this situation: all peer-reviewed research may have been affected by faulty peer review processes.
That's not even remotely related to being scientific. Using the same train of thoughts would lead to the conclusion that because homosexual behavior is widespread in nature (fact) not only are homosexuality natural as occurring in nature without external forcing factors (fact) but all animals are homosexual. Instead the logical conclusion is that homosexuality exists, is natural but _not_ the only (nor the most common) sexual orientation.
Until proven otherwise, I think we'll have to take any and all academic research with a really big grain of salt.
Bullshit. First of all maybe you should note that the research itself haven't been disproved (yet at least) second maybe you should compare the amount of research done with the the amount of known faulty peer reviews. Or your "logic" would say that because there are fake dollar bills around all dollar bills should be taken "with a really big grain of salt".
So you are an idiot. Thank you for wasting my time.
Strangely those that use that argument tend to ignore the case of very drunk guys hooking up with very drunk gals and having sex (the standard). Do they then rape each other?
Ludicrous!
O_o;;
How old are you? Are you a vampire?
I actually did wonder if they are talking about software engineers (who should be able to code - but maybe not in the test language without learning it first) or computer engineers (who really can't be expected to be programmers). Bad article with little information.
A moron that earns money by selling the test the article is about. But I agree with you, even skilled programmers make trivial errors that a compiler will complain about - in the real world they fix it in a few seconds, depending on how the test is designed that may not be possible.
First this is a claim about a proprietary test from a company earning money from it, information about what it actually does is not available without paying AFAIK.
Also I've read here and elsewhere how new employees can't code no matter where they come from or graduated. Some even claim that almost everyone interviewed didn't even have basic skills.
That's what science is about - quantifying reality in order to model it. Saying "everyone knows that X is true" is (even if "everyone" indeed think so - seldom the case) doesn't verify that X is true and if X is true under what circumstances that isn't true etc.
However the brilliant text you quoted isn't even something obvious, dreams can cause very complex patterns.
Style over function... I can understand (but not in any way like it) on consumer devices but not for something that is labeled a mobile workstation.
Information have no wants and while information (as a concept) can't be stolen this article wasn't about stealing information.
Really? Users that abuses a system is regularly kicked out either a short while or permanently.
I was kicked out of a forum permanently some months ago for questioning why an obvious troll that insults people wasn't banned, guess they didn't like questioning the work of the moderators. Why do I mention this? Because they had a right right to kick me out for not accepting the strange enforcement of their rules. Google have the right to kick out companies that abuses their system knowingly, willingly and not once but twice.
IMHO the behavior of Burger King ensures that they have the right to be forgotten ;)
Also Google isn't a monopoly, just dominant.