Because the consumption rate is far higher than the production rate, we'll eventually run out of non-renewable (actually, poorly-renewable) energy sources. From then on, it's inevitable that all energy we use is 100% 'renewable'.
Of course it's a pipe-dream if we're not willing to use it. There are plenty of opportunities we haven't taken yet. There are many ways to harness geothermal, gravitational (tidal power) and solar power, directly or indirectly, more than we've touched so far.
The only reason combustion engines are so efficient is because they're supported by decades of research. Give it time, and renewable energy can be efficient enough to replace it.
Besides increasing production, we should also work on reducing consumption. Don't assume that the trend of increasing energy use continues the way it does now.
.ch: Switzerland (Confoederatio Helvetica; Latin, because the four languages used in Schweiz/Suisse/Svizzera/Svizra don't otherwise agree on the appropriate abbreviation)
A group of executives who don't know the difference between servers and routers? ("The network is the computer"...not.)
"The network is the computer" should probably be interpreted like Plan 9 from Bell Labs did (and to a much lesser extent, UNIX), where everything (including processes) is a file and network-transparency is key.
Next time, before attacking people on sentences you don't understand, inform yourself.
Agreed. TFA eventually leads to this 'source', but it doesn't refer to actual court proceedings. This seems to be a much more authoritative source, by the way.
Of course, it's useful to cooperate and work on standards, but when you put that above your own principles -- in the case of Mozilla, that should be "an open and accessible internet" -- you're essentially dead.
If W3C institutes a bad standard, you don't have to follow them. Instead, Mozilla should've told them that they're not following suit, or even that this is the last drop and W3C can go fuck itself, and find a more creative solution to the problem of financing the internet's infrastructure.
Perhaps it has always been 55% (or lower). How did they come up with 95%? Perhaps they missed a lot of infections back then, because they didn't know what to look for, and they do know now.
1) NEVER EVER try to build an editor in a structured language. Functional languages are a poor fit for procedural tasks.
Concrete examples, please. I've been using Haskell for a few years now, and I can't see the problem with "procedural" tasks. Especially when you don't define what that means.
3) The idea that you can build a provable system using a functional language is bat crap insane. In terms of proof it'll give you nothing that good unit tests wouldn't give you.
I suspect you (or your lecturer) encountered something like QuickCheck, which is indeed not more thorough than unit tests (but properties are much easier to write).
There are definitely techniques to truly prove correctness of software, which are based on dependently-typed functional languages like Coq, Agda and Idris. In these languages, the type system is so expressive that you can express theorems in it, and values of those types are proofs.
They don't? I don't know how they happen in the USA, but I'd think they're performed by police officers. If a police officer notices a strong marijuana smell (like in this stop & search), isn't that enough for a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity, allowing a search anyway?
Another native Dutch here. If you want to read poor Dutch, go read the shit HR writes.
First off, many Dutch are anglophiles: they think English sound really much cooler than their 'boring' mother tongue. People in HR are no exception. Many Dutch also think they read, write, speak and understand English really well. Few do. Even fewer don't have an accent thick enough to stop a bullet -- which is strange, given that the majority of movies, TV series and music we get here is anglophone, with a native or 'neutralized' accent. You'd think that people pick up on that. Well, no. It's really painful to hear our Prime Minister's English, not because it's sounds bad, but because the average Dutch person speaking English sounds like this. Again, people in HR are no exception. It's even worse with HR: they copy a lot of management speak, which is invariable chock full of English-sounding terms, most of them made up or literally translated from Dutch. So, TL;DR: HR prefers to speak English, but are too stupid to notice they can't.
Secondly, we have a linguistic phenomenon called "Engelse ziekte" (lit. 'English disease'): ignoring that Dutch is an agglutinative language, and forming nouns through juxtaposition (e.g. "*tomaten zaden" for 'tomato seeds') rather than agglutination ("tomatenzaden"). Formally, this results in ungrammatical Dutch, hinders fast reading comprehension ("zaden" isn't a verb, but many plural nouns and infinitive verbs both end in "-en"), and may even change the meaning of sentences. You'd think that HR people know their own language well enough to know this; well, in many cases, they don't. Another thing that seems rocket science to some native Dutch, especially the kind of people that end up in HR, is basic verb inflections. The "dt-probleem" (not knowing whether a verb ending in an alveolar stop needs to be written with "-t", "-d" or "-dt", even though the rules are very regular) is mostly cosmetic, but it is exactly the kind of thing that makes you look "uneducated". Guess what: it's hard to find a newspaper or website that has more than a dozen descriptions that don't make those mistakes. TL;DR: HR probably won't notice basic grammatical errors in Dutch, because they make those mistakes themselves.
(Nota bene: I may be a tiny bit cynical about how well the Dutch master their own language.)
Counter-example: in League of Legends, harassment and complaints happen more often towards people in the same team than to people in the opposing team. That's because, in a way, inexperienced and unskilled team mates are 'opponents' too, by stealing kills, bounties and buffs, by not assisting the team member when they are being pursued, and by not understanding champion synergy, roles, and overall strategy, all things that can potentially cause the team as a whole and players individually to lose.
Slashdot Mirror
I call bullshit.
Little food -> accumulate fat.
Little food -> burn fat.
See the problem here?
"The network is the computer" should probably be interpreted like Plan 9 from Bell Labs did (and to a much lesser extent, UNIX), where everything (including processes) is a file and network-transparency is key.
Next time, before attacking people on sentences you don't understand, inform yourself.
You might end up like Joe Bauers.
Ack. Second 'this' should have gotten a link to some German Ministry of Justice thingy.
Agreed. TFA eventually leads to this 'source', but it doesn't refer to actual court proceedings. This seems to be a much more authoritative source, by the way.
More eyes on the manual means more criticism, which might lead to the manual being improved.
Of course, it's useful to cooperate and work on standards, but when you put that above your own principles -- in the case of Mozilla, that should be "an open and accessible internet" -- you're essentially dead.
If W3C institutes a bad standard, you don't have to follow them. Instead, Mozilla should've told them that they're not following suit, or even that this is the last drop and W3C can go fuck itself, and find a more creative solution to the problem of financing the internet's infrastructure.
Every kid knows that!
It might just be an attempt to joke about Ingsoc, you illiterate clod!
Perhaps it has always been 55% (or lower). How did they come up with 95%? Perhaps they missed a lot of infections back then, because they didn't know what to look for, and they do know now.
True.
False.
Concrete examples, please. I've been using Haskell for a few years now, and I can't see the problem with "procedural" tasks. Especially when you don't define what that means.
I suspect you (or your lecturer) encountered something like QuickCheck, which is indeed not more thorough than unit tests (but properties are much easier to write).
There are definitely techniques to truly prove correctness of software, which are based on dependently-typed functional languages like Coq, Agda and Idris. In these languages, the type system is so expressive that you can express theorems in it, and values of those types are proofs.
Have you played Bastion?
They don't? I don't know how they happen in the USA, but I'd think they're performed by police officers. If a police officer notices a strong marijuana smell (like in this stop & search), isn't that enough for a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity, allowing a search anyway?
The problem isn't how invasive it is, but how arbitrary it is. DUI checkpoints aren't as arbitrary as the 'legal' tool described in TFA.
I think Ted Nelson et al. would love to say "I told you so."
It's random enough.
(And ironically enough, I can't even get my grammatical number right in the first TL;DR.)
Another native Dutch here. If you want to read poor Dutch, go read the shit HR writes.
First off, many Dutch are anglophiles: they think English sound really much cooler than their 'boring' mother tongue. People in HR are no exception. Many Dutch also think they read, write, speak and understand English really well. Few do. Even fewer don't have an accent thick enough to stop a bullet -- which is strange, given that the majority of movies, TV series and music we get here is anglophone, with a native or 'neutralized' accent. You'd think that people pick up on that. Well, no. It's really painful to hear our Prime Minister's English, not because it's sounds bad, but because the average Dutch person speaking English sounds like this. Again, people in HR are no exception. It's even worse with HR: they copy a lot of management speak, which is invariable chock full of English-sounding terms, most of them made up or literally translated from Dutch. So, TL;DR: HR prefers to speak English, but are too stupid to notice they can't.
Secondly, we have a linguistic phenomenon called "Engelse ziekte" (lit. 'English disease'): ignoring that Dutch is an agglutinative language, and forming nouns through juxtaposition (e.g. "*tomaten zaden" for 'tomato seeds') rather than agglutination ("tomatenzaden"). Formally, this results in ungrammatical Dutch, hinders fast reading comprehension ("zaden" isn't a verb, but many plural nouns and infinitive verbs both end in "-en"), and may even change the meaning of sentences. You'd think that HR people know their own language well enough to know this; well, in many cases, they don't. Another thing that seems rocket science to some native Dutch, especially the kind of people that end up in HR, is basic verb inflections. The "dt-probleem" (not knowing whether a verb ending in an alveolar stop needs to be written with "-t", "-d" or "-dt", even though the rules are very regular) is mostly cosmetic, but it is exactly the kind of thing that makes you look "uneducated". Guess what: it's hard to find a newspaper or website that has more than a dozen descriptions that don't make those mistakes. TL;DR: HR probably won't notice basic grammatical errors in Dutch, because they make those mistakes themselves.
(Nota bene: I may be a tiny bit cynical about how well the Dutch master their own language.)
It didn't. PEAR couldn't reproduce its own results.
-- reporter is an opponent
Counter-example: in League of Legends, harassment and complaints happen more often towards people in the same team than to people in the opposing team. That's because, in a way, inexperienced and unskilled team mates are 'opponents' too, by stealing kills, bounties and buffs, by not assisting the team member when they are being pursued, and by not understanding champion synergy, roles, and overall strategy, all things that can potentially cause the team as a whole and players individually to lose.