DNA is used to make all sorts of fun things, like proteins, prions, and viruses. To be able to store arbitrary information, the dna encoding will have to allow for the creation of sequences not found in nature, or it won't achieve the desired density.since the data would have to be encoded in longer sequences of naturally-occurring dna. Either way, you've got the dna equivalent of a 3d printer.
Eliminating all diseases won't eliminate the need for doctors and nurses. A hockey puck to the face will still be a disaster that needs medical attention. As will getting hit by a self-driving vehicle. Domestic and other violence. Wars. Overdoses. Transplants as knees, hips, etc. wear out. Eliminate all diseases and people who live longer will end up needing even more attention as they get older and become less capable. What are you going to do with grandpa when he's 200 years old and can't die of natural causes?
What's with all of the gloom and doom when it comes to robotics taking over human jobs? Is it a fetish? Are there people reading this shit and masturbating?
Yes, they're the acolytes of Ayn Rand. This is a libertarian wet dream.
If it weren't for the on-board computer keeping your toy drone stable, you'd never be able to fly it. Already, computers are doing a better job of flying than humans.
Way less than 25,00 vehicles a month need to be built. Self-driving rigs don't have to take mandatory down time after x number of hours, can run almost 24x7x365, and easily replace 2 human-controlled rigs in terms of time efficiency. And they'll never be pulled over for drunk driving or be involved in an accident where the driver fell asleep at the wheel. So say 12,500 per month maximum.
PACCAR (DAF. Kenworth, Leyland, Peterbilt, various PACCAR country brands, Dynacraft) by itself currently produces 90% of that. Production won't be the problem.
Combining DNA in a near infinitude of combinations is going to require the whole thing be handled like a level 5 biohazard, because you'll be producing prions and sequences of DNA that aren't found in nature, and to which we have zero resistance. Makes a hard disk or an ssd crash look positively benign, since all you'll lose is your data.
It would also be great for making known bio-weapons - just record multiple instances of sequences for, say, smallpox, then break the seal in a populated space.
You don't need 7 channels of audio for a same screener. It's not like people are demanding absolute fidelity in a pirated product. Just look at all the awful ones out there that people still download and waste their time watching. Easier to just wait for it to come on TV if you want it for free.
The solvay process doesn't have the impurities that the mined sodium bicarb has. The ammonium bicarbonate is removed from the resulting precipitate by heating it; all the other products of the reaction except the solid sodium bicarbonate are gases. As long as the raw ingredients (dry ice, brine, and ammonia solution in water) are not contaminated, what you'll get won't be either.
It's used as a solution to clean wounds and mixed with injectable anesthetics to make them less painful. Considering how much sh*t people inject on a regular basis, including bathtub caulking* and >a href=http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/6-women-hospitalized-for-butt-enhancement-injections-with-bathtub-caulking/1#.WSNi3uvyvDA>industrial silicon oil, I doubt that there'd be enough of an impurity to make a difference considering the very small quantities used.
* Warning: gross picture (but still on of the less gross ones)
Of course I do. I often am able to provide proof they're wrong. Such as when one idiot thought that by increasing the number of records in a database by 1000 times would make a search 1000x slower, when in fact the difference is negligible. Guess he didn't understand how indexes with low vs high cardinality work, and neither did the people who backed him up.
Where did I claim China was breaking laws by executing spies? My original point was that even the Geneva Conventions allow it.
The US has been in many wars that were never declared - in fact, since only Congress has the authority to declare war, every conflict since WW2 is an "undeclared war."
The US has also stated that it is in a cyber war with China, and that Chinese spies have stolen plenty of secrets. Same with being in a cyber war with North Korea, and let's not forget Trump and Russia. All parties are using military personnel and assets. The nature and concept of war has expanded - that governments around the world accept this is simply a fact. Same as that the US for more than 70 years unconstitutionally refuses to ask Congress to declare war while waging war. The requirement of a formal declaration of war is non-existent.
Don't stick words in my mouth to make your counter-argument. Read the post you replied to - I didn't say it was acceptable. In fact, I offered no moral or ethical judgment whatsoever - I stated that it was legal, not whether it was moral or ethical.
And you don't know shit. Execution of spies is most certainly allowed under the Geneva Conventions. There is absolutely no need to take a spy as a prisoner of war. Go look it up, same as I did.
No, YOUR question was "since". So what? My original statement contained no such limitation, and do you really believe that any executions since would be advertised, especially on a bettlefield? But if you want more recent executions of traitors, look at how many officers were fragged by their own soldiers in Viet Nam. Many of these officers had it coming, and if they hadn't been fragged, would have been thrown in Leavenworth. Needlessly wasting lives to stroke your own ego or because you're an idiot is giving aid to the enemy, which is treason.
Still, you have to at least try, or you'll never know if you have the best solution to a problem. Being like the old milk wagon horse, who just follows the same route every time, works for horses until the problem (in this case, the route) changes. Besides, it's intellectually stimulating, aka it's fun:-) And every once in a while, there's enlightenment, either something new, or a better understanding of why the currently accepted way became the currently accepted way. It's a lot better than telling someone "because!" when they ask why you do something a certain way.
If you've interviewed that many people, then you know that most people can't do a simple problem on their own, and if you hire them, you should be fired. "Coding via google" is a sign of incompetence.
2 decades ago (or maybe more) I interviewed at one place, they asked me to solve a problem. I quickly wrote 3 different solutions, all of which worked. No internet. My philosophy is that you should try to find 3 different ways to solve a problem. The first will get you familiar with the problem. The second will hopefully be an improvement, as well as the third. Or you may discover that your first attempt was optimal - you can't know without trying. Which is why ANY IDIOT who goes with the "do it this way because of the mind set of the language" is not competent. They have demonstrated that they lack curiosity, which will lead you a lot further than "adopting a language's mind-set." "Why does this work?" "Can it be done better?" "Should it be done at all or can I eliminate it entirely?" "Is this something the customer wants or was it just added by some asshole boss who is lying when they say the customer wants it?"
A lot of time is wasted on that last one. Good coders can smell it a mile away, in any language.
1. Tap into the audio instead of using the microphone on the camera.
2. Doesn't have to be exact to work. Even if you get half the previous frame and half the next, it's still detectable.
Unless you're writing your own custom container classes in C++ why do you need to do memory management?
1. Because the STL is a steaming pile of shit if you want to audit ALL your code. When you write your own, you KNOW "who owns what" and all the side effects instead of having to dig through a hierarchy. The STL is not needed.
2. Because anyone coding in c++ should be able to write their own container classes - it's a basic skill. If you can't do it, you're simply not a c++ programmer.
3. Because memory management isn't hard - if you think it is, you need to practice, practice, practice.
4. Memory management isn't just for containers.
5. Using a container class is overkill in many/most situations.
6. Classes if necessary, but not necessarily classes. KISS is still a valid and essential skill.
7. Resource management. Since you're a java fan but think that c++ coders can't do Java, you should know that if you want to make the move to java, you'll have to lose the habit of thinking that destructors are called as soon as an object goes out of scope, whereas Java may never be called during the entire life of the program. Never depend on a destructor for freeing resources in a timely manner in Java.
namespaces only have relevance when you have two functions with the same name but want different return values (same name and different parameters is handled by overloading). The proper term in java is package, not namespace, even though they perform the same scoping as namespaces in c++. As long as there are no name clashes, just use the import keyword and you no longer have to use an FQN.
You also don't need to import java.lang - it's automatically imported, so you have access to Math.whateverfunction() and Math.someconstant without calling it through java.lang. Additionally, if you omit the package statement while writing a class definition, the class name is placed into the default package, which has no name. The Java compiler automatically imports this package.
It's not "icky" - it's a feature designed to make things simpler, and to the programmer it pretty much looks the same as a global namespace in c++.
Also, since all methods of Math are static, there is no reason to instantiate an object of the Math class, so you're right, you wouldn't create a Math object - you'd just call the existing static methods and values in the Math package. If you do try to create a Math object, you're doing it wrong. And the programmer for some reason doesn't know how to use classes that only have static methods and values properly, same situation as in c++.
You seem to think that nobody has several decades of experience. And you're full of shit if you thing that "great C programmers can't seem to solve even simple interview problems (in their language of choice) of the normal, daily sort in Java". Just because you never met any doesn't mean they don't exist.
So C programmers writing Java do crazy crap like not returning from the middle of a function, and Java programmers doing C do crazy crap like returning from the middle of a function.
Fuck, are you ignorant. There's no such thing as one set of best practices in ANY language. It all depends on the problem. It's perfectly fine to have multiple exit points in a function in c, rather than having a ton of conditionals so you always exit at the end (and goto is perfectly valid for some problems), so why would they have a problem doing it in Java, or vice versa.
Programming is programming. It's your mindset that is limited, probably due to a lack of experience. Call me back when you've been doing it for 3 decades.
I want a browser that (1) scrapes the site, (2) doesn't load crap OR images, (3) enforces your privacy, and (4) presents it all as the web was originally supposed to be, simple text with simple markup and no snooping that renders as YOU tell your user agent to.
I figure that with the ole'Mark 1 Eyeball, 1080p or 1080i is more than enough. Heck, the way the cataracts and retinas are going lately, it's overkill on a 50" screen from 6 feet away. I guess it gets easier to be cheap as you get older. Blu-ray and 4k would be a total waste:-)
The story talks about the execution of more than a dozen spies, but doesn't mention that this is perfectly acceptable under the Geneva Conventions. Leaving people to perhaps be a little outraged that "how dare they execute someone." The US has a history of doing the same thing (and so does pretty much everyone else on the q.t.) - I just find it interesting that neither the story, nor the comments, reflect on the consequences of this. Someone blackmails you into spying for them, you could end up dead. Why not just say "screw it" instead? You might even get your would-be blackmailer swinging at the end or a noose instead, or with, you.
Slashdot Mirror
DNA is used to make all sorts of fun things, like proteins, prions, and viruses. To be able to store arbitrary information, the dna encoding will have to allow for the creation of sequences not found in nature, or it won't achieve the desired density.since the data would have to be encoded in longer sequences of naturally-occurring dna. Either way, you've got the dna equivalent of a 3d printer.
Not really. Just look at how much junk DNA we carry around, and yet our DNA still works.
Eliminating all diseases won't eliminate the need for doctors and nurses. A hockey puck to the face will still be a disaster that needs medical attention. As will getting hit by a self-driving vehicle. Domestic and other violence. Wars. Overdoses. Transplants as knees, hips, etc. wear out. Eliminate all diseases and people who live longer will end up needing even more attention as they get older and become less capable. What are you going to do with grandpa when he's 200 years old and can't die of natural causes?
What's with all of the gloom and doom when it comes to robotics taking over human jobs? Is it a fetish? Are there people reading this shit and masturbating?
Yes, they're the acolytes of Ayn Rand. This is a libertarian wet dream.
If it weren't for the on-board computer keeping your toy drone stable, you'd never be able to fly it. Already, computers are doing a better job of flying than humans.
PACCAR (DAF. Kenworth, Leyland, Peterbilt, various PACCAR country brands, Dynacraft) by itself currently produces 90% of that. Production won't be the problem.
Combining DNA in a near infinitude of combinations is going to require the whole thing be handled like a level 5 biohazard, because you'll be producing prions and sequences of DNA that aren't found in nature, and to which we have zero resistance. Makes a hard disk or an ssd crash look positively benign, since all you'll lose is your data.
It would also be great for making known bio-weapons - just record multiple instances of sequences for, say, smallpox, then break the seal in a populated space.
You don't need 7 channels of audio for a same screener. It's not like people are demanding absolute fidelity in a pirated product. Just look at all the awful ones out there that people still download and waste their time watching. Easier to just wait for it to come on TV if you want it for free.
The solvay process doesn't have the impurities that the mined sodium bicarb has. The ammonium bicarbonate is removed from the resulting precipitate by heating it; all the other products of the reaction except the solid sodium bicarbonate are gases. As long as the raw ingredients (dry ice, brine, and ammonia solution in water) are not contaminated, what you'll get won't be either.
It's used as a solution to clean wounds and mixed with injectable anesthetics to make them less painful. Considering how much sh*t people inject on a regular basis, including bathtub caulking* and >a href=http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/6-women-hospitalized-for-butt-enhancement-injections-with-bathtub-caulking/1#.WSNi3uvyvDA>industrial silicon oil, I doubt that there'd be enough of an impurity to make a difference considering the very small quantities used.
* Warning: gross picture (but still on of the less gross ones)
Of course I do. I often am able to provide proof they're wrong. Such as when one idiot thought that by increasing the number of records in a database by 1000 times would make a search 1000x slower, when in fact the difference is negligible. Guess he didn't understand how indexes with low vs high cardinality work, and neither did the people who backed him up.
Where did I claim China was breaking laws by executing spies? My original point was that even the Geneva Conventions allow it.
The US has been in many wars that were never declared - in fact, since only Congress has the authority to declare war, every conflict since WW2 is an "undeclared war."
The US has also stated that it is in a cyber war with China, and that Chinese spies have stolen plenty of secrets. Same with being in a cyber war with North Korea, and let's not forget Trump and Russia. All parties are using military personnel and assets. The nature and concept of war has expanded - that governments around the world accept this is simply a fact. Same as that the US for more than 70 years unconstitutionally refuses to ask Congress to declare war while waging war. The requirement of a formal declaration of war is non-existent.
Point duly noted, sir. :-)
Don't stick words in my mouth to make your counter-argument. Read the post you replied to - I didn't say it was acceptable. In fact, I offered no moral or ethical judgment whatsoever - I stated that it was legal, not whether it was moral or ethical.
And you don't know shit. Execution of spies is most certainly allowed under the Geneva Conventions. There is absolutely no need to take a spy as a prisoner of war. Go look it up, same as I did.
No, YOUR question was "since". So what? My original statement contained no such limitation, and do you really believe that any executions since would be advertised, especially on a bettlefield? But if you want more recent executions of traitors, look at how many officers were fragged by their own soldiers in Viet Nam. Many of these officers had it coming, and if they hadn't been fragged, would have been thrown in Leavenworth. Needlessly wasting lives to stroke your own ego or because you're an idiot is giving aid to the enemy, which is treason.
Still, you have to at least try, or you'll never know if you have the best solution to a problem. Being like the old milk wagon horse, who just follows the same route every time, works for horses until the problem (in this case, the route) changes. Besides, it's intellectually stimulating, aka it's fun :-) And every once in a while, there's enlightenment, either something new, or a better understanding of why the currently accepted way became the currently accepted way. It's a lot better than telling someone "because!" when they ask why you do something a certain way.
But that's just me. I'm naturally curious.
If you've interviewed that many people, then you know that most people can't do a simple problem on their own, and if you hire them, you should be fired. "Coding via google" is a sign of incompetence.
2 decades ago (or maybe more) I interviewed at one place, they asked me to solve a problem. I quickly wrote 3 different solutions, all of which worked. No internet. My philosophy is that you should try to find 3 different ways to solve a problem. The first will get you familiar with the problem. The second will hopefully be an improvement, as well as the third. Or you may discover that your first attempt was optimal - you can't know without trying. Which is why ANY IDIOT who goes with the "do it this way because of the mind set of the language" is not competent. They have demonstrated that they lack curiosity, which will lead you a lot further than "adopting a language's mind-set." "Why does this work?" "Can it be done better?" "Should it be done at all or can I eliminate it entirely?" "Is this something the customer wants or was it just added by some asshole boss who is lying when they say the customer wants it?"
A lot of time is wasted on that last one. Good coders can smell it a mile away, in any language.
1. Tap into the audio instead of using the microphone on the camera.
2. Doesn't have to be exact to work. Even if you get half the previous frame and half the next, it's still detectable.
Unless you're writing your own custom container classes in C++ why do you need to do memory management?
1. Because the STL is a steaming pile of shit if you want to audit ALL your code. When you write your own, you KNOW "who owns what" and all the side effects instead of having to dig through a hierarchy. The STL is not needed.
2. Because anyone coding in c++ should be able to write their own container classes - it's a basic skill. If you can't do it, you're simply not a c++ programmer.
3. Because memory management isn't hard - if you think it is, you need to practice, practice, practice.
4. Memory management isn't just for containers.
5. Using a container class is overkill in many/most situations.
6. Classes if necessary, but not necessarily classes. KISS is still a valid and essential skill.
7. Resource management. Since you're a java fan but think that c++ coders can't do Java, you should know that if you want to make the move to java, you'll have to lose the habit of thinking that destructors are called as soon as an object goes out of scope, whereas Java may never be called during the entire life of the program. Never depend on a destructor for freeing resources in a timely manner in Java.
namespaces only have relevance when you have two functions with the same name but want different return values (same name and different parameters is handled by overloading). The proper term in java is package, not namespace, even though they perform the same scoping as namespaces in c++. As long as there are no name clashes, just use the import keyword and you no longer have to use an FQN.
You also don't need to import java.lang - it's automatically imported, so you have access to Math.whateverfunction() and Math.someconstant without calling it through java.lang. Additionally, if you omit the package statement while writing a class definition, the class name is placed into the default package, which has no name. The Java compiler automatically imports this package.
It's not "icky" - it's a feature designed to make things simpler, and to the programmer it pretty much looks the same as a global namespace in c++.
Also, since all methods of Math are static, there is no reason to instantiate an object of the Math class, so you're right, you wouldn't create a Math object - you'd just call the existing static methods and values in the Math package. If you do try to create a Math object, you're doing it wrong. And the programmer for some reason doesn't know how to use classes that only have static methods and values properly, same situation as in c++.
So C programmers writing Java do crazy crap like not returning from the middle of a function, and Java programmers doing C do crazy crap like returning from the middle of a function.
Fuck, are you ignorant. There's no such thing as one set of best practices in ANY language. It all depends on the problem. It's perfectly fine to have multiple exit points in a function in c, rather than having a ton of conditionals so you always exit at the end (and goto is perfectly valid for some problems), so why would they have a problem doing it in Java, or vice versa.
Programming is programming. It's your mindset that is limited, probably due to a lack of experience. Call me back when you've been doing it for 3 decades.
There were plenty who were shot in the field in WW2 by both sides. It's perfectly legal.
I want a browser that (1) scrapes the site, (2) doesn't load crap OR images, (3) enforces your privacy, and (4) presents it all as the web was originally supposed to be, simple text with simple markup and no snooping that renders as YOU tell your user agent to.
I can dream, right?
I figure that with the ole'Mark 1 Eyeball, 1080p or 1080i is more than enough. Heck, the way the cataracts and retinas are going lately, it's overkill on a 50" screen from 6 feet away. I guess it gets easier to be cheap as you get older. Blu-ray and 4k would be a total waste :-)
The story talks about the execution of more than a dozen spies, but doesn't mention that this is perfectly acceptable under the Geneva Conventions. Leaving people to perhaps be a little outraged that "how dare they execute someone." The US has a history of doing the same thing (and so does pretty much everyone else on the q.t.) - I just find it interesting that neither the story, nor the comments, reflect on the consequences of this. Someone blackmails you into spying for them, you could end up dead. Why not just say "screw it" instead? You might even get your would-be blackmailer swinging at the end or a noose instead, or with, you.