Even if Mars could be colonized, only a few rich people will be able to afford to make the trip, so it's not going to do anything to fix the "fishbowl problem".
You're going to argue that writing a couple of unnecessary braces is a better approach than relying on the indentation you're already supposed to be doing instead?
Yes. Relying on indentation sucks. For instance, if you have a tool that combines user code with generated code, it is much easier for that tool to throw in some braces, than it is to generate the correct indention. Indentation also sucks if you combine code from different users (like a code snippet you find on-line). Indentation also sucks if you have a combination of tabs and spaces. I agree that's bad practice, but sometimes it happens, and you may not be aware of it.
We need to teach people how to use logic, perform analysis and give clear descriptions of what they want to happen
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I deal with people describing what they want, and in my experience, I'd much rather deal with somebody who can tell in his own terms what problems he's facing, and wants to have fixed. The worst are people who know a little bit about coding, and instead of describing the problem, they start describing a "solution" they came up with.
the Xbox's CPU can be emulated, but not accurately and not in real time - which is the whole point of a useful emulation.
Not really relevant anymore. A single x86 CPU doesn't even run the same code in exactly the same way as it did 2 seconds ago. There could easily be an order of magnitude difference, if not several orders.
Why would you send bitmaps over the line when the only thing that matters is the rendering and state of standardized widgets?
Because sending a bitmap Just Works. A bitmap is a bitmap, and 10 years from now, will still be a bitmap. Rendering and standardized widgets change all the time.
If there were more advanced civilizations before us, there's no reason to think we'd know about them.
Some things would have survived, just like some of our products will survive for a very long time. Our geostationary satellites will be there for a very long time, for example.
It does not follow that increased CO2 causes more desertification. The argument is pathetic on the face of it.
They have a better argument than you. They are putting all the data in a model, and see what comes out. Whereas you just compare our climate with the Jurassic, and do a bit of handwaving, as if there are no differences except the CO2 levels.
1 - the temps taken >100 years ago cannot be as reliable today
The increase in temperature over the last 100 years is well over the margin of error.
2 - that the scientists have been adjusting numbers to fit models, rather than fixing models to fit the numbers
They correct both bad data, as well as bad models. All of the data and model source code is available on line, so if you suspect any wrongdoing, please be so kind to point it out.
Here's what I don't get; you obviously believe in the vaccine, so your kid got the shot, as did mine, and can't get the disease.
Protection rate for vaccines is not perfect. So, there may still be a 10% chance that your vaccinated kid gets the disease. If your kid only meets my vaccinated kid, the chance drops to 1%.
Without indent, it becomes really hard to determine which { goes with }, especially if you make the code a bit longer. And with indent, it quickly becomes too deep.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if Mars could be colonized, only a few rich people will be able to afford to make the trip, so it's not going to do anything to fix the "fishbowl problem".
You're going to argue that writing a couple of unnecessary braces is a better approach than relying on the indentation you're already supposed to be doing instead?
Yes. Relying on indentation sucks. For instance, if you have a tool that combines user code with generated code, it is much easier for that tool to throw in some braces, than it is to generate the correct indention. Indentation also sucks if you combine code from different users (like a code snippet you find on-line). Indentation also sucks if you have a combination of tabs and spaces. I agree that's bad practice, but sometimes it happens, and you may not be aware of it.
We need to teach people how to use logic, perform analysis and give clear descriptions of what they want to happen
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I deal with people describing what they want, and in my experience, I'd much rather deal with somebody who can tell in his own terms what problems he's facing, and wants to have fixed. The worst are people who know a little bit about coding, and instead of describing the problem, they start describing a "solution" they came up with.
Let's start there. We need basic financial literacy. We need basic scientific literacy
Good idea. Let's make an app for that.
Nobody wants to look at old porn.
No, we need to finish Skynet as soon as we can, and then it can do all the coding for us.
the Xbox's CPU can be emulated, but not accurately and not in real time - which is the whole point of a useful emulation.
Not really relevant anymore. A single x86 CPU doesn't even run the same code in exactly the same way as it did 2 seconds ago. There could easily be an order of magnitude difference, if not several orders.
Why would you send bitmaps over the line when the only thing that matters is the rendering and state of standardized widgets?
Because sending a bitmap Just Works. A bitmap is a bitmap, and 10 years from now, will still be a bitmap. Rendering and standardized widgets change all the time.
Again: toys. All you care about is toys, it seems
Most people will care about the things they can relate too.
The only people who will care about COBOL are people concerned with actual historical records
Those people need to get laid more often.
There is no good excuse for Apple, Microsoft and others making the OS's not compatible with legacy software.
Sure there is. It costs a lot of money to keep everything compatible.
If there were more advanced civilizations before us, there's no reason to think we'd know about them.
Some things would have survived, just like some of our products will survive for a very long time. Our geostationary satellites will be there for a very long time, for example.
Deciding what was worth preserving is a useless job. Something was either saved, or it wasn't, and the decision has already been made.
With respect, what is and what isn't worth preserving is up to future historians to decide
It's up to us to decide how much we care about what future historians want.
Both things happen. Temperature reacts to CO2 and CO2 reacts to temperature. This is a well known fact.
It is also a well known fact that current CO2 rise is man-made.
It does not follow that increased CO2 causes more desertification. The argument is pathetic on the face of it.
They have a better argument than you. They are putting all the data in a model, and see what comes out. Whereas you just compare our climate with the Jurassic, and do a bit of handwaving, as if there are no differences except the CO2 levels.
I guess humans didint live through the MWP or the LIA.
Bad example. It is hotter than MWP right now.
stop this BULLSHIT about climate change and wasting 100s of billions a year into it
We're not spending 100s of billions on it. In fact, we're doing pretty much nothing.
That's why we have error bars, and the proxies have much wider error bars than the direct measurements.
1 - the temps taken >100 years ago cannot be as reliable today
The increase in temperature over the last 100 years is well over the margin of error.
2 - that the scientists have been adjusting numbers to fit models, rather than fixing models to fit the numbers
They correct both bad data, as well as bad models. All of the data and model source code is available on line, so if you suspect any wrongdoing, please be so kind to point it out.
If they only have one opening, and the particle goes in, it shouldn't be too big to go back out, right ? Same as if they get some sand inside.
Neither are dogs, but if they eat a lego, it still comes back out.
then concentrate it further inside their bodies
Why don't they just poop it back out ?
Why should I vaccinate my kid and risk any side effects, if everyone else is getting the shot, the herd immunity will keep my kid safe, too
At least they do believe the vaccine is effective. :)
Here's what I don't get; you obviously believe in the vaccine, so your kid got the shot, as did mine, and can't get the disease.
Protection rate for vaccines is not perfect. So, there may still be a 10% chance that your vaccinated kid gets the disease. If your kid only meets my vaccinated kid, the chance drops to 1%.
I mean fine, believe what you want, but don't call yourself an engineer when you hold so much science in contempt guys.
Well, they're just engineers, not scientists.
Without indent, it becomes really hard to determine which { goes with }, especially if you make the code a bit longer. And with indent, it quickly becomes too deep.