I think that for a certain type of personality, diligent self-study is a reasonable approach. There's always more to learn, but if you learn some every week it piles up in a kind of exponential way. If you're the kind of person who can learn from either written material (books, tutorials, reading other people's code, etc.) or recorded lectures, or some mixture of those, imo self-study is actually probably more likely to result in deeply learning a subject than a code academy. The main advantage of the "bootcamp" approach is that it provides a focused environment, if you're otherwise prone to slacking/procrastinating, or just can't learn at all w/o an in-person instructor. But I worry that it will result in a lot of superficial learning: memorizing some $hot_language syntax and design patterns and that kind of thing.
Yes, by this criterion anything that most private companies do is actually done by a "government-funded agency". Your company got a grant from the U.S. Small Business Administration grant? It's now a "government-funded agency"!
A more accurate description of this case: a third-party private organization wants to publish information about videogame sexism, and they got a small grant ($37k, i.e. enough to pay an intern) to investigate the possibility. That does not sound to me like The State mandating anything. Especially in Sweden, these kinds of small exploratory grants are given out to a really broad range of organizations. Your local badminton team can probably qualify for one! (Not a joke. There is a specific budget in Sweden for small grants to community sports organizations.)
Mono is impressive, but doesn't have the development resources to really compete with the CLR or JVM for a lot of workloads. The garbage collector in particular is not as good. That's one reason you see languages that want to build on top of an open-source VM, like Clojure or Scala, targeting the JVM rather than Mono.
In fact they're more or less prohibited from doing anything except janitorial work. For example they have the power to make someone into an administrator, but they are only supposed to do so in response to each Wikipedia's own community process deciding on it. Each wiki has its own process where you can request to become administrator, people can comment on the request, and there is some decision-making process. If the outcome is "yeah, make this person an administrator", then one of the stewards is supposed to make that person an admin. If they decided to just take some other person who hadn't been approved by the German Wikipedia, and turn them into an admin on the German Wikipedia, they'd quickly lose their own "steward" bit.
It's been pretty well known that oceans play an important role in climate, yes. That is why, for example, Norway is habitable. But you might want to read the paper (or at least the abstract) to see what specifically it's claiming. They are not claiming to have discovered the idea of oceans being related to climate.
Also: El Niño is pretty irrelevant to a discussion of geological timescale phenomena.
It may seem like you can test everything in Tetris just by playing it for a few minutes, but this is very unlikely! As I explain in this article, the game is filled with special cases that rarely occur in normal play, and these can only be easily found with the help of a coverage tool.
Tetris doesn't need coverage tool to test you. Everything about you.
Code-coverage tool is crutch for weak capitalist engineer. Tetris is Soviet technology, forged by people's will.
I'm not sure if it's the same as the "terrorist watch list", but there's some kind of intermediate "can fly, but only after extra hassle" list also. I was on one for a while, apparently because of some British person with the same name as mine (I'm American, but have a very common English name). I couldn't use web check-in and had to always go to the airport to check-in with a person, who would first assume I was just dumb and didn't know how to use the machine, then after they verified I could indeed not check in on the machine, they'd poke around at the desk a bit, then call someone, check my ID, then give me a boarding pass, I guess after verifying I was not the other guy. Could've been worse, but was pretty annoying, especially because nobody would actually explain what was going on.
Android could perfectly well let you give an app local permissions without giving it call-out-to-the-network permissions. Snapsave shouldn't need to ever call out to external servers in the first place, if it does only what it advertises.
Android doesn't do this because of their broken ad-based ecosystem, though: they don't want to draw your attention to apps that unnecessarily call out to the network, because the most common reason for doing so is to show ads.
It's true that without controlling the endpoints, Snapchat can't stop one particular attack vector: the people who control those devices saving images themselves. The usual "DRM" problem.
But what seems to have happened here is that users installed an app which, unbeknownst to them, sent copies of the images to a third-party server. That threat model is possible to guard against, although it's arguably more an issue with Android than Snapchat that something like that easily happens without users noticing, because Android's app-permission model leaks like a sieve.
Apple does that too, though on end-user machines. When connecting to wifi, it doesn't enable the connection until it first verifies you're really connected. It does that by trying to pull a specific known Apple URL. If it doesn't get the expected contents, it guesses you're behind a wifi hotspot's login wall, and pops up the "please log in" page. The intent of this is to make sure apps like Dropbox and your email and whatever don't think they're back online and start failing connections, in the time between when you connect to a hotspot wifi and when you log in. But it also means that if Apple's URL goes down, wifi connection will end up with extra hoops to jump through to get it to work.
I don't have any experience with the military, but I do have experience working with defense contractors on DARPA projects, and in that context I have not been very impressed.
First of all, barely anybody lives in Saskatchewan. It has about 0.2% of the population of North America. If you plot a population density map of the continent, Saskatchewan is in the "unpopulated' part of the continent.
Second, I'm not claiming it never spikes or dips to those temperatures, just that nowhere inhabited actually stays in those range of temperatures for any significant length of time, except a few Siberian cities that exist for strange Soviet-related historical reasons. There is no month of the year in which the average temperature in Saskatoon is below 0 F. The coldest is December, which has an average temperature of 4 F (average high 14 F, average low -5 F).
Now Yakutsk, Russia, that's a cold city, which somehow has as many people as Saskatoon. Average temperature in December? -37 F (average high -31 F, average low -43 F). That is uninhabitable territory, but the USSR managed to inhabit it, go figure. However outside of Siberia, you don't find cities in such climates.
A rounding error from zero people live in such temperatures. Not even the inhabited parts of Norway have such a climate. Some parts of Siberia, basically, which were forcibly settled by the USSR.
My experience with doctor's offices has been that everything is kept on paper, and they fax things around if they need to transfer the data "electronically"...
It is now under the primary control of Apple, certainly, but it didn't "come out of the Apple compiler group" as you erroneously stated. It came out of the University of Illinois's compiler group. In addition, Lattner was not the only person developing it there.
It is true that LLVM has been Apple-driven since 2005, but it didn't come out of Apple— they picked it up after it was already out there.
That's getting less common since Debian and Ubuntu no longer have bash as/bin/sh. There are still packages that expect that, but they now don't work on Debian, Ubuntu, or the BSDs, which starts to make it more likely the authors will care about fixing them.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that for a certain type of personality, diligent self-study is a reasonable approach. There's always more to learn, but if you learn some every week it piles up in a kind of exponential way. If you're the kind of person who can learn from either written material (books, tutorials, reading other people's code, etc.) or recorded lectures, or some mixture of those, imo self-study is actually probably more likely to result in deeply learning a subject than a code academy. The main advantage of the "bootcamp" approach is that it provides a focused environment, if you're otherwise prone to slacking/procrastinating, or just can't learn at all w/o an in-person instructor. But I worry that it will result in a lot of superficial learning: memorizing some $hot_language syntax and design patterns and that kind of thing.
Yes, by this criterion anything that most private companies do is actually done by a "government-funded agency". Your company got a grant from the U.S. Small Business Administration grant? It's now a "government-funded agency"!
A more accurate description of this case: a third-party private organization wants to publish information about videogame sexism, and they got a small grant ($37k, i.e. enough to pay an intern) to investigate the possibility. That does not sound to me like The State mandating anything. Especially in Sweden, these kinds of small exploratory grants are given out to a really broad range of organizations. Your local badminton team can probably qualify for one! (Not a joke. There is a specific budget in Sweden for small grants to community sports organizations.)
Fun fast: I am literally posting this post using quantum physics.
Mono is impressive, but doesn't have the development resources to really compete with the CLR or JVM for a lot of workloads. The garbage collector in particular is not as good. That's one reason you see languages that want to build on top of an open-source VM, like Clojure or Scala, targeting the JVM rather than Mono.
In fact they're more or less prohibited from doing anything except janitorial work. For example they have the power to make someone into an administrator, but they are only supposed to do so in response to each Wikipedia's own community process deciding on it. Each wiki has its own process where you can request to become administrator, people can comment on the request, and there is some decision-making process. If the outcome is "yeah, make this person an administrator", then one of the stewards is supposed to make that person an admin. If they decided to just take some other person who hadn't been approved by the German Wikipedia, and turn them into an admin on the German Wikipedia, they'd quickly lose their own "steward" bit.
If it was designed for hilly cities, "Copenhagen wheel" is kind of a hilariously off-the-mark branding.
It's been pretty well known that oceans play an important role in climate, yes. That is why, for example, Norway is habitable. But you might want to read the paper (or at least the abstract) to see what specifically it's claiming. They are not claiming to have discovered the idea of oceans being related to climate.
Also: El Niño is pretty irrelevant to a discussion of geological timescale phenomena.
It may seem like you can test everything in Tetris just by playing it for a few minutes, but this is very unlikely! As I explain in this article, the game is filled with special cases that rarely occur in normal play, and these can only be easily found with the help of a coverage tool.
Tetris doesn't need coverage tool to test you. Everything about you.
Code-coverage tool is crutch for weak capitalist engineer. Tetris is Soviet technology, forged by people's will.
Under communism there is no private sector, thereby solving the problem of government officials moonlighting for private-sector companies. ;-)
I hope it does along with the form factor...
I'm not sure if it's the same as the "terrorist watch list", but there's some kind of intermediate "can fly, but only after extra hassle" list also. I was on one for a while, apparently because of some British person with the same name as mine (I'm American, but have a very common English name). I couldn't use web check-in and had to always go to the airport to check-in with a person, who would first assume I was just dumb and didn't know how to use the machine, then after they verified I could indeed not check in on the machine, they'd poke around at the desk a bit, then call someone, check my ID, then give me a boarding pass, I guess after verifying I was not the other guy. Could've been worse, but was pretty annoying, especially because nobody would actually explain what was going on.
Android could perfectly well let you give an app local permissions without giving it call-out-to-the-network permissions. Snapsave shouldn't need to ever call out to external servers in the first place, if it does only what it advertises.
Android doesn't do this because of their broken ad-based ecosystem, though: they don't want to draw your attention to apps that unnecessarily call out to the network, because the most common reason for doing so is to show ads.
It's true that without controlling the endpoints, Snapchat can't stop one particular attack vector: the people who control those devices saving images themselves. The usual "DRM" problem.
But what seems to have happened here is that users installed an app which, unbeknownst to them, sent copies of the images to a third-party server. That threat model is possible to guard against, although it's arguably more an issue with Android than Snapchat that something like that easily happens without users noticing, because Android's app-permission model leaks like a sieve.
It's used in a ton of places in the bowels of big companies as well.
Apple does that too, though on end-user machines. When connecting to wifi, it doesn't enable the connection until it first verifies you're really connected. It does that by trying to pull a specific known Apple URL. If it doesn't get the expected contents, it guesses you're behind a wifi hotspot's login wall, and pops up the "please log in" page. The intent of this is to make sure apps like Dropbox and your email and whatever don't think they're back online and start failing connections, in the time between when you connect to a hotspot wifi and when you log in. But it also means that if Apple's URL goes down, wifi connection will end up with extra hoops to jump through to get it to work.
I don't have any experience with the military, but I do have experience working with defense contractors on DARPA projects, and in that context I have not been very impressed.
calamari is squid, not octopus!
First of all, barely anybody lives in Saskatchewan. It has about 0.2% of the population of North America. If you plot a population density map of the continent, Saskatchewan is in the "unpopulated' part of the continent.
Second, I'm not claiming it never spikes or dips to those temperatures, just that nowhere inhabited actually stays in those range of temperatures for any significant length of time, except a few Siberian cities that exist for strange Soviet-related historical reasons. There is no month of the year in which the average temperature in Saskatoon is below 0 F. The coldest is December, which has an average temperature of 4 F (average high 14 F, average low -5 F).
Now Yakutsk, Russia, that's a cold city, which somehow has as many people as Saskatoon. Average temperature in December? -37 F (average high -31 F, average low -43 F). That is uninhabitable territory, but the USSR managed to inhabit it, go figure. However outside of Siberia, you don't find cities in such climates.
A rounding error from zero people live in such temperatures. Not even the inhabited parts of Norway have such a climate. Some parts of Siberia, basically, which were forcibly settled by the USSR.
It does vaguely fit North American weather patterns: 0-100 F is vaguely habitable, below 0 F is unlivably cold, above 100 F is unlivably hot.
* complex open source middleware
* for the cloud
My experience with doctor's offices has been that everything is kept on paper, and they fax things around if they need to transfer the data "electronically"...
Natural-phenomenon news is one of those things that isn't a recent /. change. Random example.
It is now under the primary control of Apple, certainly, but it didn't "come out of the Apple compiler group" as you erroneously stated. It came out of the University of Illinois's compiler group. In addition, Lattner was not the only person developing it there.
It is true that LLVM has been Apple-driven since 2005, but it didn't come out of Apple— they picked it up after it was already out there.
That's getting less common since Debian and Ubuntu no longer have bash as /bin/sh. There are still packages that expect that, but they now don't work on Debian, Ubuntu, or the BSDs, which starts to make it more likely the authors will care about fixing them.