No, the article is just terrible at explaining what FRP is. The idea of FRP is that you stop simply having the idea of having values, and start having the idea of "time varying values". So instead of having an int, which I change the state of at a bunch of times, I can have a Reactive which represents the value of the int at all possible times. You can then treat these as first class citizens, which you can manipulate, so if you have a Reactive representing the time, you can do things like time + 1, and get a new reactive int representing one second later than the current time.
These can be combined in much more complex ways to produce much more interesting behaviours than "hey, what will the time be in one second".
You're doing it wrong. With 150 employees you should not need 5 IT staff even, let alone more after that. Fix what you're doing wrong (to me, it sounds like you're micromanaging everyone's machines, and wasting a whole bunch of time in doing it).
And this... this is everything that's wrong with the american's version of liberalism.
American liberalism: You can do whatever you want. Everyone else's liberalism: You can do whatever you want as long as you don't harm others by doing it.
Bear in mind that today's 5000 series actually does compete pretty bloody well with nVidia and AMD. It's near impossible to get a faster GPU in a thin and light laptop. The GeForce 740m is the same speed as it, the 750m is getting into power brackets that can't be put in a thin and light, and is only about 10-20% faster than the 5200 pro.
For me, Intel is doing a pretty impressive job of catching up. We've gone from intel being no where in terms of GPU performance to being able to equal the best nVidia and AMD can do at least in the power constrained market.
Certainly as a temporary measure, but you would hope that what they would eventually (fairly quickly) do is make the email server inaccessible to the public internet, and require use of a VPN to check email. Then this problem doesn't simply move to starbucks.
Well, feel free to live without street lighting, rubbish collection, or sewers and drainage if you don't like paying your $3000;) Off you go to the woods to live like a hermit.
Oh okay, so then corrupts and broccoli become unhealthy the moment that a large factory start cranking them out? Sounds reasonable. Better steer clear of pretty much any carrots of broccoli sold in a supermarket, because guess where they came from!
The point is that the term "processed food' is inaccurate speech at best, and complete bullshit at worst. There are planting of "processed" things (e.g. E-350/Asorbic Acid) that are things you absolutely want to be consuming plenty of, there are plenty of unprocessed things (e.g. Cyonide found in apple pips) that you absolutely don't want to consume any of.
What they *should* be saying is not to consume poisons, or not to consume sufficient volumes of the good stuff that it becomes poisonous. Neither of these has anything at all to do with the level of processing involved.
The problem with paper bags is that they have a higher environmental cost in manufacturing than plastic bags (surprising, i know, but they do), and that they are almost never reused.
That, and they're shit – they will split if you put anything remotely heavy in them.
Not quite the same thing, but in the UK, we have a crime of "going equipped" – that is, carrying tools of the trade to rob houses etc. It's effectively the same law, just with a different target.
It turned into a liberal vs conservative issue because those who aren't in favour of workers not being made ill by their work needed a way to justify that, and therefore did their best to associate it with what's commonly seen as an extreme, and slightly insane political affiliation. They then burned this straw political affiliation man at the steak to demonstrate how dumb it was to support the idea of workers not being made ill by their work.
Common misconception. It's actually entirely possible than 90% of drivers are above average... If 10% of drivers crash the very second they start the engine.
You can infer nothing at all about the percentage that are below average from that stat, beyond "it's less than 100%, and more than 0%".
So, this is an ancient topic, but I thought I'd follow up. I happened to be on the I-280 for a short stretch the other day when it was nearly clear and moving very well. I decided to track whether I was spectacularly unobservant or not. The answer: By doing 65mph down it ±2mph consistently, I overtook well over 20 cars, and was overtaken by 4.
Basically, no, the normal speed on a freeway is *not* well above the speed limit. There are a few who do it, but it's far from normal.
The question is clearly ridiculous. The problem lies there and solely there though, unlike as the article suggests. Expecting 5 or 6 year olds to be able to do basic addition and subtraction of small quantities of physical items is not a problem at all –that's exactly what I'd expect a 5 or 6 year old to be able to do. Writing crappy questions like pearson has is absolutely a problem though.
Maybe the US cops have a different attitude (I doubt it, really), but in the UK, the police receive exactly this training (to back off from a pursuit when they can), and regularly do so. There, when a pursuit starts, the driver's co-driver needs to confirm to control that the driver is trained as a pursuit driver, and is driving a suitable vehicle. They then relay the content of the pursuit, and the conditions of it back to control so that they can make a decision about whether it's safe to continue it or not (and whether it's sufficiently in the public interest to risk killing pedestrians etc, vs catching someone). It's common for them then to call in the police helicopter. Once that happens, and the helicopter is overhead, they back away from the chase, so that it slows down and becomes less dangerous. The helicopter tracks the car until the occupants bail, and the cops are generally sufficiently close that they go and bag them.
The cost of insuring the police to do this (which has *huge* legal liability attached to it).
The cost of sending cops to the scene when the fleeing driver inevitably hits something.
The cost of sending cops to the scene, and to people's houses to tell them a loved one is dead, when the fleeing driver inevitably hits some *one*.
3. $500, get the fuck outa here. Nobody cares that much except the BBC who suckered you all into looking at ads over their vaporware story anyway.
This is the key though. A police pursuit is expensive –really expensive. First, you're likely to involve at least 5 vehicles (if not directly in the pursuit, then trying to close the driver down into a net), that means 10 drivers being paid, 5 engines burning a lot of fuel. Then you're likely to call in the helicopter, because otherwise the chance of losing them is very high. The chances that one of the cops hits something during the pursuit are increased, increasing the chance of damage to a police vehicle. Add to that the the fleeing driver may deliberately hit the police car, causing significant damage. All this added up together likely means that it costs more than $500 to run a pursuit. Thus, this could well be a cost saving.
This also addresses points 1 and 4 (which were actually 3 in disguise). Point 2 is just plain wrong. Point 5 isn't a point.
Not really to defend her, but remember, these guys are combat pilots. The idea is in fact that when it really matters they are not surrounded by emptiness, they're surrounded by missiles, shells, enemy aircraft, friendly aircraft, etc. Their HUDs are explicitly designed to help them not collide with things, and to cause other people to collide with other things.
That said, the "I was using my HUD" argument, is 90% bullshit –it's just a thin cover for "I wanted to check Facebook on the move".
I believe the point is that the latter is impossible, and will remain impossible until the general level of education rises. Of course, then you're stuck in a catch 22. The former helps to increase the level of education, and saves people money, it therefore can not be a bad thing.
Were they not able to sell or trade used books before? I know in college they change books like every year to squeeze more money out of you, but I figured in south africa they might assume the people cant quite afford it and use the same book year after year.
If you think changing the book is to squeeze money out of you, and not... you know, because you've finished learning from it and need something else to learn, then you're in trouble. Using the same book year after year is probably one of the reasons the learning outcomes are so terrible:P
Slashdot Mirror
"right now"? SICP has been popular since the 70s, and with good reason.
No, the article is just terrible at explaining what FRP is. The idea of FRP is that you stop simply having the idea of having values, and start having the idea of "time varying values". So instead of having an int, which I change the state of at a bunch of times, I can have a Reactive which represents the value of the int at all possible times. You can then treat these as first class citizens, which you can manipulate, so if you have a Reactive representing the time, you can do things like time + 1, and get a new reactive int representing one second later than the current time.
These can be combined in much more complex ways to produce much more interesting behaviours than "hey, what will the time be in one second".
You can see a simple example of this, describing the n-bodies problem here http://noordering.wordpress.com/2009/02/01/simulating-n-bodies-and-functional-programmingre/
You're doing it wrong. With 150 employees you should not need 5 IT staff even, let alone more after that. Fix what you're doing wrong (to me, it sounds like you're micromanaging everyone's machines, and wasting a whole bunch of time in doing it).
And this... this is everything that's wrong with the american's version of liberalism.
American liberalism: You can do whatever you want.
Everyone else's liberalism: You can do whatever you want as long as you don't harm others by doing it.
Bear in mind that today's 5000 series actually does compete pretty bloody well with nVidia and AMD. It's near impossible to get a faster GPU in a thin and light laptop. The GeForce 740m is the same speed as it, the 750m is getting into power brackets that can't be put in a thin and light, and is only about 10-20% faster than the 5200 pro.
For me, Intel is doing a pretty impressive job of catching up. We've gone from intel being no where in terms of GPU performance to being able to equal the best nVidia and AMD can do at least in the power constrained market.
Certainly as a temporary measure, but you would hope that what they would eventually (fairly quickly) do is make the email server inaccessible to the public internet, and require use of a VPN to check email. Then this problem doesn't simply move to starbucks.
Well, feel free to live without street lighting, rubbish collection, or sewers and drainage if you don't like paying your $3000 ;) Off you go to the woods to live like a hermit.
Oh okay, so then corrupts and broccoli become unhealthy the moment that a large factory start cranking them out? Sounds reasonable. Better steer clear of pretty much any carrots of broccoli sold in a supermarket, because guess where they came from!
The point is that the term "processed food' is inaccurate speech at best, and complete bullshit at worst. There are planting of "processed" things (e.g. E-350/Asorbic Acid) that are things you absolutely want to be consuming plenty of, there are plenty of unprocessed things (e.g. Cyonide found in apple pips) that you absolutely don't want to consume any of.
What they *should* be saying is not to consume poisons, or not to consume sufficient volumes of the good stuff that it becomes poisonous. Neither of these has anything at all to do with the level of processing involved.
The problem with paper bags is that they have a higher environmental cost in manufacturing than plastic bags (surprising, i know, but they do), and that they are almost never reused.
That, and they're shit – they will split if you put anything remotely heavy in them.
Not quite the same thing, but in the UK, we have a crime of "going equipped" – that is, carrying tools of the trade to rob houses etc. It's effectively the same law, just with a different target.
Ah right, illness that you can't see manifest on the surface is not illness at all, right?
It turned into a liberal vs conservative issue because those who aren't in favour of workers not being made ill by their work needed a way to justify that, and therefore did their best to associate it with what's commonly seen as an extreme, and slightly insane political affiliation. They then burned this straw political affiliation man at the steak to demonstrate how dumb it was to support the idea of workers not being made ill by their work.
Okay... Found them. 2 and 3.
No, that's true of the mean average. The mean average of [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,9] is 2. 90% of the samples are below average.
Common misconception. It's actually entirely possible than 90% of drivers are above average... If 10% of drivers crash the very second they start the engine.
You can infer nothing at all about the percentage that are below average from that stat, beyond "it's less than 100%, and more than 0%".
Sorry, you're claiming taxis and trains have lower costs than driving? Where the hell are you living? I'd love to be there!
Here, a taxi is orders of magnitude more expensive. A train close to equal, but still more.
So, this is an ancient topic, but I thought I'd follow up. I happened to be on the I-280 for a short stretch the other day when it was nearly clear and moving very well. I decided to track whether I was spectacularly unobservant or not. The answer: By doing 65mph down it ±2mph consistently, I overtook well over 20 cars, and was overtaken by 4.
Basically, no, the normal speed on a freeway is *not* well above the speed limit. There are a few who do it, but it's far from normal.
The question is clearly ridiculous. The problem lies there and solely there though, unlike as the article suggests. Expecting 5 or 6 year olds to be able to do basic addition and subtraction of small quantities of physical items is not a problem at all –that's exactly what I'd expect a 5 or 6 year old to be able to do. Writing crappy questions like pearson has is absolutely a problem though.
Maybe the US cops have a different attitude (I doubt it, really), but in the UK, the police receive exactly this training (to back off from a pursuit when they can), and regularly do so. There, when a pursuit starts, the driver's co-driver needs to confirm to control that the driver is trained as a pursuit driver, and is driving a suitable vehicle. They then relay the content of the pursuit, and the conditions of it back to control so that they can make a decision about whether it's safe to continue it or not (and whether it's sufficiently in the public interest to risk killing pedestrians etc, vs catching someone). It's common for them then to call in the police helicopter. Once that happens, and the helicopter is overhead, they back away from the chase, so that it slows down and becomes less dangerous. The helicopter tracks the car until the occupants bail, and the cops are generally sufficiently close that they go and bag them.
Self reply, but I missed a few costs:
The cost of insuring the police to do this (which has *huge* legal liability attached to it).
The cost of sending cops to the scene when the fleeing driver inevitably hits something.
The cost of sending cops to the scene, and to people's houses to tell them a loved one is dead, when the fleeing driver inevitably hits some *one*.
3. $500, get the fuck outa here. Nobody cares that much except the BBC who suckered you all into looking at ads over their vaporware story anyway.
This is the key though. A police pursuit is expensive –really expensive. First, you're likely to involve at least 5 vehicles (if not directly in the pursuit, then trying to close the driver down into a net), that means 10 drivers being paid, 5 engines burning a lot of fuel. Then you're likely to call in the helicopter, because otherwise the chance of losing them is very high. The chances that one of the cops hits something during the pursuit are increased, increasing the chance of damage to a police vehicle. Add to that the the fleeing driver may deliberately hit the police car, causing significant damage. All this added up together likely means that it costs more than $500 to run a pursuit. Thus, this could well be a cost saving.
This also addresses points 1 and 4 (which were actually 3 in disguise). Point 2 is just plain wrong. Point 5 isn't a point.
Not really to defend her, but remember, these guys are combat pilots. The idea is in fact that when it really matters they are not surrounded by emptiness, they're surrounded by missiles, shells, enemy aircraft, friendly aircraft, etc. Their HUDs are explicitly designed to help them not collide with things, and to cause other people to collide with other things.
That said, the "I was using my HUD" argument, is 90% bullshit –it's just a thin cover for "I wanted to check Facebook on the move".
I believe the point is that the latter is impossible, and will remain impossible until the general level of education rises. Of course, then you're stuck in a catch 22. The former helps to increase the level of education, and saves people money, it therefore can not be a bad thing.
Were they not able to sell or trade used books before? I know in college they change books like every year to squeeze more money out of you, but I figured in south africa they might assume the people cant quite afford it and use the same book year after year.
If you think changing the book is to squeeze money out of you, and not... you know, because you've finished learning from it and need something else to learn, then you're in trouble. Using the same book year after year is probably one of the reasons the learning outcomes are so terrible :P