How many people had running water, toilets, and electricity in 1915?
Toilets, most people in the 1st world. At worst if you lived in a worker area of a big city you shared the toilets with you neighbour. Electricity is more recent, many rural areas didn't get that until the 1960s, and running water in rural areas depends on pumps and often came with electricity, in cities running water goes back to the Ancient rome.
It may have been generated via "AI" techniques, but the results are little if any better than a simple Markov-Chain text generator, of the kind I built back in the 80s with my programmable calculator... and used today to generate spam emails.
The only difference I see is that there are pictures accompanying the "articles". But I don't see anything about an algorithm for that, so I think I am safe to presume that the text is generated by the so-called "AI", but composed by an actual human.
Try reading the article. The pictures are selecting using a standard image search with the generated headline as topic.
This would seem to be covered by the "well regulated" bit of the 2nd Amendment. If you are letting kids get hold of your guns, you are not well regulated.
Well obviously kids with guns are infantry not militia.
Pretty much I went through that whole Content Settings section and selected "oh hell no" on day one of having Chrome.
Let a web page give push notifications to my desktop? No, hell no, oh god no, please fuck off and go away no.
It requires explicit persmission from the user before sending any, and is useful if you are using webmail, web-based calender or a web-based chat/conference solution. For ChromeOS it makes sense because everything there is a web-app, so it is the way to make notifications.
Inflation benefits governments and other profligate borrowers. Deflation benefits savers (and everyone else, to a lesser extent.)
Precisely this. For my part, this fairly obvious fact is highly likely to account for why inflation is never allowed to stop. Cynical? You bet.
You know 99% of people are not 1%ers right? That means they owe more than they own so benefitting from inflation and even the rich don't worry about inflation because they invest and investments follow inflation. Only idiots with money in mattresses are hurt by inflation.
Actually, these games need to include the political disaster where you get stuck with a crack-smoking mayor, yelling: "Bitch set me up... goddamn bitch!"
Marion Barry and Rob Ford would be perfect role models!
Libetarianism was original about social issue because it is a French synonym for Liberalism, much like Republicanism was, they all meant the same thing: Liberalism. It had multiple additional names when it was young, but you wouldn't recognize them.
If you put any thought into this at all, you realize it is a massive conspiracy. Other automakers add expensive, space consuming devices to eliminate NO pollution. These is no way a single programmer could have made a change and all the engineers would go "Look, we don't need all the extra hardware, it passes the test!" Lots of people would notice immediately during the design phase.
Not really. A manager demands the feature in the software provided by Bosch, who warns him not to leave it in the final production, then they leave it on.
Not much of a conspiracy, but certainly a very deliberate decision from at least someone high enough to negotiate software deals with partners.
I've worked as a partner for some car companies in both the US and the EU, and I know for a fact that the firmware that goes into their control systems is very tightly controlled, requiring sign-offs from senior execs for design and feature changes.
There's no way code this critical could have simply been dropped in by some R&D leads. No. Way.
Yeah, but we already know where it comes from. Bosch wrote it for VW supposedly for internal testing. From there it is just an order to leave it on in production.
and libertarianism as originally defined was about social issues: i can wear what i want, say what i want, use what drugs i want, no constraints
then it got adapted as "don't tax the rich" by plutocrats and their sycophants in the usa and american morons lapped it up, and now it has a mostly economic meaning in the usa
I think you mean liberalism, which meaning has been drifting further left in the US, but drifted right in Europe. Libertarianism is an American neologism to compensate for that, and appears specifically used to by people who favors economic cronyism.
No it isn't. Apple LENT them a unit, and they tore it down. If I lend you a lawnmower, and with out my permission (unauthorised) you pull it apart, then I'm going to punish you too.
If iFixit waited till they could buy their own in store, then tore that down, then there wouldn't be a problem.
If you send a free lawnmover to a lawnmover pulling apart company, I would assume you intended for them to pull it apart, since that is the only thing they do with lawnmovers.
And just as much that he is right. The correlation is strong in children. In adults the IQ is much stronger correlated with length of education, guardians, teachers and friends.
We are going Chip-and-Signature in the U.S., but if we were going Chip-and-PIN it could shift liability to the cardholder. Chip-and-PIN is thought to be secure, so the presumption of innocence may not hold as it does today.
If the PIN-code has been entered correctly, then you are liable for insecure handling of your pin-code, then only amounts over a certain size are covered. If no pin-code was entered and the money stolen some other way, then you are not liable for anything. Usually the shop that allowed signature instead is.
Also you need a police report for having your card stolen. Been there done that, got my money back.
The thing with chip, is that the bank can tell if the card was in machine, which machine and if pin-code was demanded by the shop or not. Even if somehow through a security hole, fraud comes in from machines without a card, they can block those and trace back to who did it (who received the money is an easy question).
Why can't Apple have motives that are altruistic, and then also point out how different those motives are from Google's?
Because Apple are not altruistic. It is a public traded company and are not supposed to, or even allowed to be in some placed. and on top of that it has a long history of a sociopathic corporate culture.
In this particular topic, they have even less respect for privacy than Microsoft does, the difference being that Microsoft users were user to more respect.
Except the two "4G" technologies and marketing that don't meet the 4G standard didn't come from U.S. carriers, they came from European and Asian carriers, who then pressured ITU-R into accepting that marketing as 4G even though it didn't meet the standard.
So, sorry to spoil your U.S. Americorp conspiracy, but we were late to the party on that bullshit.
Nope. The technology comes from Europe, but in Europe it was called 3.5G, only in the US was it marketed at 4G.
As soon as it starts spreading it rapidly becomes indistinguishable from background noise, especially over insterstellar distances. And all of that's assuming the laser isn't occluded by whatever it's targeting, which it probably would be 99% of the time. No, I fear the chances that random stray communications of whatever sort might hit us would probably be vanishingly unlikely, especially over the short period we've been listening.
Well, we could search for unexplained and very localized increases in white noise. Also the universe background noise isn't completely white.
You are at an ATM, you insert your card, the card can not be read: DamagedCardException.
The card can be read and you are asked to enter the code, code is wrong: InvalidCodeException
You enter the code three times wrong: CardSwallowedException
You enter the code correctly and want to withdraw $1000, but the bank does not acknowledge: TransactionNotPossibleException.
NONE of the above exceptions will terminate the ATM software but will return with a hopefully meaningful message to the main menu.
(*Facepalm*) For the application it should be absolutely no difference if you handle errors with error codes or with exceptions. The user should not see any difference, the program should behave exactly the same. However: working with exceptions is 100 times easier for developers than working with error codes. If that is not true for you then for funk sake: you should definitely not be a programmer!!!!
I don't think you should be a programmer. None of those cases are exceptions, they are errors, errors needs to be handled through normal code path. if you haven't figured out how to handle the potential errors you need to think your design over again, instead of throwing an exception in a half-done transaction and hoping it get magically unwrapped to something that isn't completely fucked.
If your code isn't exception-safe, it's probably bad in several other ways. It's not that difficult to get it right, if you have a clue, and will avoid other problems. If you think industry best practice is C++ that isn't exception-safe, I don't want to work where you do.
If you think it is easy, you are doing it wrong. It is as difficulty as coding thread-safe code without using mutexes and semaphores. Execution might be cut at any point in time and the state has to be consistent at that time. If you set a pointer to an array and then the length to it, you are not doing it thread-safe because an exception might come inbetween, which means something as simple as setting data needs to be controlled by state-classes that can rollback half completed state changes in case of an exception.
The easiest way to get around it, is just to use functional programming style where you have little or no state, but that also implies reducing the multiparadigme langauge of C++ to just one paradigme
Slashdot Mirror
How many people had running water, toilets, and electricity in 1915?
Toilets, most people in the 1st world. At worst if you lived in a worker area of a big city you shared the toilets with you neighbour. Electricity is more recent, many rural areas didn't get that until the 1960s, and running water in rural areas depends on pumps and often came with electricity, in cities running water goes back to the Ancient rome.
"New Rule: Lawrence V. Williams, Turkey Or Child -- A Good Guide"
If loving this is wrong, I don't want to be right :)
"Taylor Swift: The New Face of Victim of Peace Talks"
It may have been generated via "AI" techniques, but the results are little if any better than a simple Markov-Chain text generator, of the kind I built back in the 80s with my programmable calculator... and used today to generate spam emails.
The only difference I see is that there are pictures accompanying the "articles". But I don't see anything about an algorithm for that, so I think I am safe to presume that the text is generated by the so-called "AI", but composed by an actual human.
Try reading the article. The pictures are selecting using a standard image search with the generated headline as topic.
This would seem to be covered by the "well regulated" bit of the 2nd Amendment. If you are letting kids get hold of your guns, you are not well regulated.
Well obviously kids with guns are infantry not militia.
> and is useful if you are using webmail,
No it isn't. There already exists an API in HTML5 to display popup notifications when needed.
Yes, that is what we are talking about. What are YOU talking about?
Settings > Show Advanced Settings > Privacy > Content Settings > Notifications.
Pretty much I went through that whole Content Settings section and selected "oh hell no" on day one of having Chrome.
Let a web page give push notifications to my desktop? No, hell no, oh god no, please fuck off and go away no.
It requires explicit persmission from the user before sending any, and is useful if you are using webmail, web-based calender or a web-based chat/conference solution. For ChromeOS it makes sense because everything there is a web-app, so it is the way to make notifications.
Precisely this. For my part, this fairly obvious fact is highly likely to account for why inflation is never allowed to stop. Cynical? You bet.
You know 99% of people are not 1%ers right? That means they owe more than they own so benefitting from inflation and even the rich don't worry about inflation because they invest and investments follow inflation. Only idiots with money in mattresses are hurt by inflation.
Actually, these games need to include the political disaster where you get stuck with a crack-smoking mayor, yelling: "Bitch set me up ... goddamn bitch!"
Marion Barry and Rob Ford would be perfect role models!
How would that be bad for the city? ;)
Libetarianism was original about social issue because it is a French synonym for Liberalism, much like Republicanism was, they all meant the same thing: Liberalism. It had multiple additional names when it was young, but you wouldn't recognize them.
Or go to school. Or drive. I mean, I can understand why some people might frown on breaking up families...
You understand why rape victims get stoned to death for being raped?
If you put any thought into this at all, you realize it is a massive conspiracy. Other automakers add expensive, space consuming devices to eliminate NO pollution. These is no way a single programmer could have made a change and all the engineers would go "Look, we don't need all the extra hardware, it passes the test!" Lots of people would notice immediately during the design phase.
Not really. A manager demands the feature in the software provided by Bosch, who warns him not to leave it in the final production, then they leave it on.
Not much of a conspiracy, but certainly a very deliberate decision from at least someone high enough to negotiate software deals with partners.
I've worked as a partner for some car companies in both the US and the EU, and I know for a fact that the firmware that goes into their control systems is very tightly controlled, requiring sign-offs from senior execs for design and feature changes.
There's no way code this critical could have simply been dropped in by some R&D leads. No. Way.
Yeah, but we already know where it comes from. Bosch wrote it for VW supposedly for internal testing. From there it is just an order to leave it on in production.
and libertarianism as originally defined was about social issues: i can wear what i want, say what i want, use what drugs i want, no constraints
then it got adapted as "don't tax the rich" by plutocrats and their sycophants in the usa and american morons lapped it up, and now it has a mostly economic meaning in the usa
I think you mean liberalism, which meaning has been drifting further left in the US, but drifted right in Europe. Libertarianism is an American neologism to compensate for that, and appears specifically used to by people who favors economic cronyism.
No it isn't. Apple LENT them a unit, and they tore it down. If I lend you a lawnmower, and with out my permission (unauthorised) you pull it apart, then I'm going to punish you too.
If iFixit waited till they could buy their own in store, then tore that down, then there wouldn't be a problem.
If you send a free lawnmover to a lawnmover pulling apart company, I would assume you intended for them to pull it apart, since that is the only thing they do with lawnmovers.
I would say behaviour learned from the parents is at least as important.
There is plenty of evidence that says you are wrong.
And just as much that he is right. The correlation is strong in children. In adults the IQ is much stronger correlated with length of education, guardians, teachers and friends.
Who wrote the software and who told him to write the software?
Another company called Bosch, they warned VW only to use it in testing, not in production.
We are going Chip-and-Signature in the U.S., but if we were going Chip-and-PIN it could shift liability to the cardholder. Chip-and-PIN is thought to be secure, so the presumption of innocence may not hold as it does today.
If the PIN-code has been entered correctly, then you are liable for insecure handling of your pin-code, then only amounts over a certain size are covered. If no pin-code was entered and the money stolen some other way, then you are not liable for anything. Usually the shop that allowed signature instead is.
Also you need a police report for having your card stolen. Been there done that, got my money back.
The thing with chip, is that the bank can tell if the card was in machine, which machine and if pin-code was demanded by the shop or not. Even if somehow through a security hole, fraud comes in from machines without a card, they can block those and trace back to who did it (who received the money is an easy question).
Why can't Apple have motives that are altruistic, and then also point out how different those motives are from Google's?
Because Apple are not altruistic. It is a public traded company and are not supposed to, or even allowed to be in some placed. and on top of that it has a long history of a sociopathic corporate culture.
In this particular topic, they have even less respect for privacy than Microsoft does, the difference being that Microsoft users were user to more respect.
Except the two "4G" technologies and marketing that don't meet the 4G standard didn't come from U.S. carriers, they came from European and Asian carriers, who then pressured ITU-R into accepting that marketing as 4G even though it didn't meet the standard.
So, sorry to spoil your U.S. Americorp conspiracy, but we were late to the party on that bullshit.
Nope. The technology comes from Europe, but in Europe it was called 3.5G, only in the US was it marketed at 4G.
And now I haven't had enough sleep for getting out of bed at 4am, slashdot really does waste time ;)
Isnt this what they did for the notification anyway?
Almost but it wasn't a security patch.
As soon as it starts spreading it rapidly becomes indistinguishable from background noise, especially over insterstellar distances. And all of that's assuming the laser isn't occluded by whatever it's targeting, which it probably would be 99% of the time. No, I fear the chances that random stray communications of whatever sort might hit us would probably be vanishingly unlikely, especially over the short period we've been listening.
Well, we could search for unexplained and very localized increases in white noise. Also the universe background noise isn't completely white.
I don't realy get why people write this nonsense.
You are at an ATM, you insert your card, the card can not be read: DamagedCardException.
The card can be read and you are asked to enter the code, code is wrong: InvalidCodeException
You enter the code three times wrong: CardSwallowedException
You enter the code correctly and want to withdraw $1000, but the bank does not acknowledge: TransactionNotPossibleException.
NONE of the above exceptions will terminate the ATM software but will return with a hopefully meaningful message to the main menu.
(*Facepalm*)
For the application it should be absolutely no difference if you handle errors with error codes or with exceptions. The user should not see any difference, the program should behave exactly the same.
However: working with exceptions is 100 times easier for developers than working with error codes.
If that is not true for you then for funk sake: you should definitely not be a programmer!!!!
I don't think you should be a programmer. None of those cases are exceptions, they are errors, errors needs to be handled through normal code path. if you haven't figured out how to handle the potential errors you need to think your design over again, instead of throwing an exception in a half-done transaction and hoping it get magically unwrapped to something that isn't completely fucked.
If your code isn't exception-safe, it's probably bad in several other ways. It's not that difficult to get it right, if you have a clue, and will avoid other problems. If you think industry best practice is C++ that isn't exception-safe, I don't want to work where you do.
If you think it is easy, you are doing it wrong. It is as difficulty as coding thread-safe code without using mutexes and semaphores. Execution might be cut at any point in time and the state has to be consistent at that time. If you set a pointer to an array and then the length to it, you are not doing it thread-safe because an exception might come inbetween, which means something as simple as setting data needs to be controlled by state-classes that can rollback half completed state changes in case of an exception.
The easiest way to get around it, is just to use functional programming style where you have little or no state, but that also implies reducing the multiparadigme langauge of C++ to just one paradigme
Isn't Facebook an Irish company?
As much as Apple and Google are.