That's impossible. I am offended you don't give credit to God for granting us these freedoms. You heathen. In reality, getting offended is an American past time, and being outraged is the natural human state.
The reason for removing it is what makes it censorship. If someone goes through and removes all the jokes they don't like from open source documentation, that is censorship, just like if someone removes (or challenges) all the books they don't like from the library. Libraries remove books to make room for other books or because they are damaged, but that isn't enough to make it censorship. People who advocate removing all humor from open source documentation should be aborted.
Exactly. If we lose humor in the next of professionalism, we've lost a major benefit of open source. Open source is not professional, it's a hack that ends up better than professional. If it were professional we'd have a registry and would eschew bsd lsd.
TensorFlow is generic enough that it will likely be around for at least a decade, and these particular chips will be obsolete by new technology long before then. It's a sweet framework.
Also, I don't know if it's accurate to say machine learning is evolving quickly......it would be more accurate to say researchers are exploring the solution space that recently became accessible as a result of recent increases in processing power. To really make an evolution we'd have to figure out how to break out of that solution space (I have some ideas on how to do that, but ideas are cheap).
Loss of consciousness from complete oxygen deprivation happens within about 15 seconds,
You need to clarify on this point, because someone can hold their breath, depriving themselves of any gasses in the environment, and live longer than 15 seconds.
If you want to talk about other areas of the country, you have this sort of angry citizen showing up to city council meetings:
“Have you considered the racket and the lights and the crowds and the traffic, and everything that’s going to happen to those of us who live here?”
It is a familiar sight in America: the public meeting, the angry residents, the housing developer trying to explain himself over the boos.
“Take the money you’ve got and get out of here,” one person shouts. A chant begins: “Oppose! Oppose! Oppose!”
And of course, this sort of thing happens in California, too. For years there's been a billboard along highway 580 opposing new housing in the bay area.
Californians want housing, but not in their back yard, and not in a way that reduces their current house value. If you have a house in California, you are probably the same.
California is not full. California is not even full in San Francisco. The only reason we don't build enough houses in California is because we don't want to build them. That is why the price goes up.
But he did not do any of that. He did not defraud anybody. He did not access a protected computer (with or without authorization). He did not exceed the authorized access as no authorization was given.
He was in Canada, so you will have to look up the exact wording of the law in Canada.
Some laws have intent written into them specifically. If there is a law that says, "If you intend to commit a crime when reading a public road sign, that is against the law," then doing so is a crime, but there is no such law.
In America, the Computer Fraud and Abuse act includes such language: "knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access"
Intent is an important part of many laws. For example, it is entirely legal to carry lock-picking tools, but if you carry them with the intent of committing a crime (or even merely have them while committing a crime), that is illegal. I don't know the specifics of Canadian law, but presumably intent is an important aspect of the particular hacking law he was accused of breaking.
In America, if you use someone else's computer in any way with the intent to hack, even just typing a simple sql exploit into your browser URL bar, then you've committed a crime.
"Carbohydrates with little nutrition" is the phrase used,
And it's a wrong phrase. Carbohydrates are macronutrients, an important type of nutrient.
Other people use the term "empty carbs" to mean carbohydrates without many vitamins or micronutrients. Other times they use the term to mean carbohydrates with a high glycemic index (because they rapidly affect your blood sugar). Sometimes people say "empty calories" when they really mean "foods high in fat." A lot of times people have only a vague idea of what they mean: they use it in a poorly defined way, and it means something like "food I don't like."
"Empty carbs" is one of those terms, that when used by a public speaker or celebrity, indicates they have no clue what they are talking about. Asking them to define it can really help clarify the issue: whether they understand the words they speak or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. Redhat shouldn't call themselves professional until they stop closing security bugs "won't fix"
That's impossible. I am offended you don't give credit to God for granting us these freedoms. You heathen. In reality, getting offended is an American past time, and being outraged is the natural human state.
The reason for removing it is what makes it censorship. If someone goes through and removes all the jokes they don't like from open source documentation, that is censorship, just like if someone removes (or challenges) all the books they don't like from the library. Libraries remove books to make room for other books or because they are damaged, but that isn't enough to make it censorship. People who advocate removing all humor from open source documentation should be aborted.
Exactly. If we lose humor in the next of professionalism, we've lost a major benefit of open source. Open source is not professional, it's a hack that ends up better than professional. If it were professional we'd have a registry and would eschew bsd lsd.
Worked fine for Obama. Maybe more challengers should try it.
Arguably, stockholders don't matter at all. It sounds like all their institutional investors will get their money back, with interest.
TensorFlow is generic enough that it will likely be around for at least a decade, and these particular chips will be obsolete by new technology long before then. It's a sweet framework.
Also, I don't know if it's accurate to say machine learning is evolving quickly......it would be more accurate to say researchers are exploring the solution space that recently became accessible as a result of recent increases in processing power. To really make an evolution we'd have to figure out how to break out of that solution space (I have some ideas on how to do that, but ideas are cheap).
I'd be careful with this "politics as usual" play. I suspect it isn't as effective as it once was.
"Sweep the corrupt blokers out of office!" has been effective for decades, if not centuries. It's just politics as usual, and so is Trump.
Nice links.
It's strange that places that have the highest distrust of government also are cool with the government executing people
I think they dislike the federal government. The confederate government is just fine.
Loss of consciousness from complete oxygen deprivation happens within about 15 seconds,
You need to clarify on this point, because someone can hold their breath, depriving themselves of any gasses in the environment, and live longer than 15 seconds.
Everyone wants to make money on their homes, not just Californians
Well yes, but you asked about California. This graph makes clear that it's a supply problem in California. Unless you want people to leave the state.
If you want to talk about other areas of the country, you have this sort of angry citizen showing up to city council meetings:
“Have you considered the racket and the lights and the crowds and the traffic, and everything that’s going to happen to those of us who live here?”
It is a familiar sight in America: the public meeting, the angry residents, the housing developer trying to explain himself over the boos.
“Take the money you’ve got and get out of here,” one person shouts. A chant begins: “Oppose! Oppose! Oppose!”
And of course, this sort of thing happens in California, too. For years there's been a billboard along highway 580 opposing new housing in the bay area.
Californians do want housing,
Californians want housing, but not in their back yard, and not in a way that reduces their current house value. If you have a house in California, you are probably the same.
Um, who else is going to build houses in California except people inn California? Are you trying to talk about foreign contractors or something?
People in California.
California is not full. California is not even full in San Francisco. The only reason we don't build enough houses in California is because we don't want to build them. That is why the price goes up.
I'm running a Lenovo P51 with a Xeon, 64 GB ECC, and two 1TB NVMe drives in a zfs-raid (Hello 4GB/s disk read speeds on a laptop).
That's a big......drive.
In short, he did not violate any law,
You can't know that without reading the law.
But he did not do any of that. He did not defraud anybody. He did not access a protected computer (with or without authorization). He did not exceed the authorized access as no authorization was given.
He was in Canada, so you will have to look up the exact wording of the law in Canada.
"Intent to hack", with "hacking" being left entirely undefined
It's not undefined. You have to read the law to know the definition. If you're too lazy to do that, then you won't know the definition.
What happened to Wordpad? I used to use it fairly often.
If I say anything about Canadian law, I am doing nothing but wildly speculating.
Some laws have intent written into them specifically. If there is a law that says, "If you intend to commit a crime when reading a public road sign, that is against the law," then doing so is a crime, but there is no such law.
In America, the Computer Fraud and Abuse act includes such language: "knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access"
Intent is an important part of many laws. For example, it is entirely legal to carry lock-picking tools, but if you carry them with the intent of committing a crime (or even merely have them while committing a crime), that is illegal. I don't know the specifics of Canadian law, but presumably intent is an important aspect of the particular hacking law he was accused of breaking.
In America, if you use someone else's computer in any way with the intent to hack, even just typing a simple sql exploit into your browser URL bar, then you've committed a crime.
"Carbohydrates with little nutrition" is the phrase used,
And it's a wrong phrase. Carbohydrates are macronutrients, an important type of nutrient.
Other people use the term "empty carbs" to mean carbohydrates without many vitamins or micronutrients. Other times they use the term to mean carbohydrates with a high glycemic index (because they rapidly affect your blood sugar). Sometimes people say "empty calories" when they really mean "foods high in fat." A lot of times people have only a vague idea of what they mean: they use it in a poorly defined way, and it means something like "food I don't like."
"Empty carbs" is one of those terms, that when used by a public speaker or celebrity, indicates they have no clue what they are talking about. Asking them to define it can really help clarify the issue: whether they understand the words they speak or not.