Unless you're reading a different claim than I am, according to Snopes the figure is based on a misreading of a GAO report which actually covered over 50 years (not 4) of arrest (not conviction) records.
Also I find it perverse that node.js is taking over server development. Really? At what scale? [Again, sincerely curious.]
Anyone who has used node.js knows full well that it scales to one CPU and one CPU only.
OK, yes, it uses C++ threads for asynchronous I/O. But you can't run JS code on more than one CPU. Node.JS is essentially what happens if you take Erlang/OTP and make it less useful.
Problem is, the first programming language you learn, is what your mind will use as reference to learn other programming languages.
The whole generation brought up on 8-bit interpreted BASIC would strongly disagree with this.
The second most important language that you will learn is language number two, because this is where you will unlearn everything you assumed when using your first. This, I think, is where people who have Python as their first language are at a disadvantage, because Python is like a lot of languages and a lot of languages are like Python, so your chances aren't good. If you don't choose one that's extremely different, the rot will set in early.
The most important language that you will learn is the one you're going to learn next. If you have any sense, it will be as different as possible from all the ones you already know. Choose wisely.
It doesn't do anything that other languages don't, probably better, its syntax is weird, and it uses "significant white space", which most programmers I know do not like.
Most programmers that I know don't like significant white space as it has been done in Python, for sure, but most programmers that I know don't know that Python's realisation isn't the only way it can be done. In almost 30 years of using David Turner family languages (of which Haskell is the only one that still exists), I've only ever seen one complaint (made many, many times!) about the indentation rules and it's been fixed.
I'm pretty sure that the supposed productivity improvements of using Python don't exist. You're either doing something extremely simple (which Python is admittedly good at) or you're not counting the time spent testing and debugging as part of the time spent developing.
In a language with a high-quality type system, a large class of bugs don't make it through the compiler. Fixing those bugs doesn't feel productive, but in my experience it takes less time overall than having to find the bugs yourself.
Show some data to make your point about the efficacy of walls against migration (the topic).
If you go back to the start of this thread, it claims that part of the human cost of not having a wall is death by drug overdose. The efficacy of a wall in clamping down on drug trafficking is entirely on topic.
If I were the Democrats right now, I'd offer just enough money to do a detailed engineering study and a thorough environmental impact assessment. Seems like a small price to pay to get a reality check.
Which border did the ones in New York cross illegally?
The main problem with the statistics, however, is that the US does not incarcerate murderers for only one year. To find the yearly homicide rate, divide 5400 by the average length of a sentence in years. Then it's not 2%, but something much closer to statistical noise.
If you want to talk about reducing deaths from overdoses then by all means let's talk about building a high quality public health system.
Apart from a handful of niche applications (assisted communication for certain disabilities, things that involve GIS in the field) it still seems like a lot of money for what is essentially a magazine-sized e-reader.
Science function on a similar system of TRUST, TRUST is not FAITH, FAITH is believing without evidence but TRUST is accepting something as true based on a repeated pattern of evidence presented to you constructed on a pyramide of previous evidence.
If you look in a reputable dictionary, you'll find that "trust" or "loyalty" is literally what the word "faith" means. That's what it's always meant, and it's the way that you use it in any non-religious context, too.
Maybe some fundamentalist has tried to tell you to trust something without evidence, but no linguist ever has. Well, if they do not if they're acting in good faith. Perhaps you should check their bona fides.
What is a "climate denier"? An attempt to equate people like me with holocaust denial?
I don't know you. I can't comment on you or people like you.
As a general comment, the term arose in general psychological usage during the height of AIDS denialism (i.e. those who deny that AIDS is caused by HIV). It can refer to flat-earthers, evolution deniers, and GMO deniers (i.e. people who believe that GMO foods in general are less safe than the current food supply; it doesn't include people with economic objections).
It can also refer to people who deny historical consensuses, because it's the same psychological processes going on.
The thing that climate deniers on Slashdot should understand more than most is that climate scientists are scientists and love technology and gadgets and shit. If there was any way to believe that we could just keep.going with coal power, scientists would be pushing it harder than anyone.
(And indeed some do, with carbon capture and other assorted "cleaner coal" technology. Full disclaimer: I used to do numeric models for carbon sequestration. I still think it will work as a transition technology.)
It sucks that nobody in power can think of anything productive to do with single-industry towns when the industry becomes obsolete or unsustainable. Surely the modern economy has some meaningful jobs available?
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody is saying that you should be put in prison or fined for merely sharing fake news or inept satire.
But on the other hand, nobody who says or spreads patent nonsense on the Internet should be "allowed" to be immune from fact checking.
Unless you're reading a different claim than I am, according to Snopes the figure is based on a misreading of a GAO report which actually covered over 50 years (not 4) of arrest (not conviction) records.
Also I find it perverse that node.js is taking over server development. Really? At what scale? [Again, sincerely curious.]
Anyone who has used node.js knows full well that it scales to one CPU and one CPU only.
OK, yes, it uses C++ threads for asynchronous I/O. But you can't run JS code on more than one CPU. Node.JS is essentially what happens if you take Erlang/OTP and make it less useful.
Problem is, the first programming language you learn, is what your mind will use as reference to learn other programming languages.
The whole generation brought up on 8-bit interpreted BASIC would strongly disagree with this.
The second most important language that you will learn is language number two, because this is where you will unlearn everything you assumed when using your first. This, I think, is where people who have Python as their first language are at a disadvantage, because Python is like a lot of languages and a lot of languages are like Python, so your chances aren't good. If you don't choose one that's extremely different, the rot will set in early.
The most important language that you will learn is the one you're going to learn next. If you have any sense, it will be as different as possible from all the ones you already know. Choose wisely.
Anything depending on anything approaching real-time responses cannot use Java.
A lot of applications that need low-latency real-time responses cannot use Linux. Or Intel hardware.
It doesn't do anything that other languages don't, probably better, its syntax is weird, and it uses "significant white space", which most programmers I know do not like.
Most programmers that I know don't like significant white space as it has been done in Python, for sure, but most programmers that I know don't know that Python's realisation isn't the only way it can be done. In almost 30 years of using David Turner family languages (of which Haskell is the only one that still exists), I've only ever seen one complaint (made many, many times!) about the indentation rules and it's been fixed.
I'm pretty sure that the supposed productivity improvements of using Python don't exist. You're either doing something extremely simple (which Python is admittedly good at) or you're not counting the time spent testing and debugging as part of the time spent developing.
In a language with a high-quality type system, a large class of bugs don't make it through the compiler. Fixing those bugs doesn't feel productive, but in my experience it takes less time overall than having to find the bugs yourself.
If I were the Democrats, I'd offer funding for the engineering studies and environmental impact assessments.
What if the company is one of the world's largest providers of free personal email which it hands out on a non-discriminatory basis?
Bring your whole self to work. Except the part of you that hates being treated like shit by your employer.
You can install non-Apple-approved apps on an iPhone, right?
Show some data to make your point about the efficacy of walls against migration (the topic).
If you go back to the start of this thread, it claims that part of the human cost of not having a wall is death by drug overdose. The efficacy of a wall in clamping down on drug trafficking is entirely on topic.
The use of rocket launchers in home invasions is rare at best. Drug traffickers are regularly using tshirt cannons right now.
If I were the Democrats right now, I'd offer just enough money to do a detailed engineering study and a thorough environmental impact assessment. Seems like a small price to pay to get a reality check.
the wall forces most shipments to pass into inspection.
A wall is no barrier to a drug trafficker armed with a drone or a tshirt cannon.
Which border did the ones in New York cross illegally?
The main problem with the statistics, however, is that the US does not incarcerate murderers for only one year. To find the yearly homicide rate, divide 5400 by the average length of a sentence in years. Then it's not 2%, but something much closer to statistical noise.
If you want to talk about reducing deaths from overdoses then by all means let's talk about building a high quality public health system.
Wait, so if the Kindle Fire is useful, then the ipad is useful. The assertion wasn't that the ipad was overpriced, but that it was not useful.
The person I responded to said it wasn't useful. I strongly implied that it was overpriced.
Apart from a handful of niche applications (assisted communication for certain disabilities, things that involve GIS in the field) it still seems like a lot of money for what is essentially a magazine-sized e-reader.
Science function on a similar system of TRUST, TRUST is not FAITH, FAITH is believing without evidence but TRUST is accepting something as true based on a repeated pattern of evidence presented to you constructed on a pyramide of previous evidence.
If you look in a reputable dictionary, you'll find that "trust" or "loyalty" is literally what the word "faith" means. That's what it's always meant, and it's the way that you use it in any non-religious context, too.
Maybe some fundamentalist has tried to tell you to trust something without evidence, but no linguist ever has. Well, if they do not if they're acting in good faith. Perhaps you should check their bona fides.
If moderating "-1, Spite" makes you feel better, okay.
None of this is personal from my perspective. I don't know you either.
What is a "climate denier"? An attempt to equate people like me with holocaust denial?
I don't know you. I can't comment on you or people like you.
As a general comment, the term arose in general psychological usage during the height of AIDS denialism (i.e. those who deny that AIDS is caused by HIV). It can refer to flat-earthers, evolution deniers, and GMO deniers (i.e. people who believe that GMO foods in general are less safe than the current food supply; it doesn't include people with economic objections).
It can also refer to people who deny historical consensuses, because it's the same psychological processes going on.
Mate, I have trouble believing Australia exists some of the time, and I live there.
The thing that climate deniers on Slashdot should understand more than most is that climate scientists are scientists and love technology and gadgets and shit. If there was any way to believe that we could just keep.going with coal power, scientists would be pushing it harder than anyone.
(And indeed some do, with carbon capture and other assorted "cleaner coal" technology. Full disclaimer: I used to do numeric models for carbon sequestration. I still think it will work as a transition technology.)
It sucks that nobody in power can think of anything productive to do with single-industry towns when the industry becomes obsolete or unsustainable. Surely the modern economy has some meaningful jobs available?
The professors know this and are lying. Their real agenda is just to impose a blanket ban on the manufacture of all bacon, ham, pastrami, salami etc.
It's all a conspiracy by Big Mince.
I haven't heard of it either, but there is plenty of precedent for the initial observation that triggers an investigation being a bit off the wall.
It's not like the investigation stopped with cows and expired herring.