My guess is that farmers in rich countries (who can afford things like Monsanto chemicals) expect the lower crop yields to mostly affect other farmers in poor countries, which would lead to higher prices and more profit for the rich countries' farmers.
The farmers in poor countries probably are complaining, of course, but nobody gives a shit about people in poor countries.
"Why do people in the west make such a big deal about our very limited hunting of whales?" asks Hideki Moronuki.
"How would they feel if we told Americans they couldn't hunt deer, or if we told Australians to stop hunting kangaroos?"
That Hideki Moronuki fellow doesn't know what he's talking about: at least in the American case, deer are overpopulated to the point of becoming a pest (mostly because their natural predators, e.g. wolves, are endangered). When there aren't enough interested hunters to go kill them for food or sport, we have to pay people to cull them anyway.
That's a bad way to evaluate the false positive rate because it assumes the distribution of terrorist names is the same as the distribution of names in Social Security. In reality there aren't many Muslims in the US...
Which isn't particularly relevant, since terrorists operating in the US are statistically most likely to be white US citizens with "American-sounding" names.
Grant the presumption that a church marriage constitutes a civil union for legal purposes.
Or better yet, don't.
The most appropriate thing for the government to say, Constitutionally speaking, is something like "Oh, you had some sort of religious ceremony? That's fine, but it's completely irrelevant."
But even then state governments still manage to be different from private entities, which is what this Baidu ruling was about.
Baidu may be evil and its policies odious, but (since it isn't a government) it apparently has a right to be so.
Of course, we do also have rulings that things like anti-discrimination laws can be enforced upon businesses, so clearly some limitation of the businesses' free speech is allowed. I could see this ruling being overturned on appeal if the argument is made that allowing a business to censor is similar to allowing a business to discriminate.
The horrendous fall through behaviour of switch statements
Hey, I like the fall through behavior of switch statements!
Granted, you want a break statement for each case more often than not (and if you're using an IDE, then I think it's reasonable that it should insert one for your automatically), but there are plenty of circumstances where it's a good idea to have a group of cases that all do the same thing, or where you want to do case A and B's actions for case B, etc.
You mean how AMD's unified GPU & CPU chips are designed? (The PS4 uses an AMD processor, and I believe that Sony had much less design influence it than it did on Cell.)
Yes, it seems like nVidia might finally be starting to slowly catch up...
The bottom line is really simple: increasing automation means that a larger percentage of production comes from capital, and less from labor. Ubiquitous automation means that nearly all production comes from capital, and almost none from labor.
The consequence of this is that everyone who derives their income from labor rather than return on capital is screwed. There are only two choices: invest enough to become financially independent (and hope that you can do it before you lose your career to automation), or hope that society sees fit to redistribute wealth so that those without control of capital don't starve.
The catch-22 is that the people whose occupations are most in danger from automation are also those with the lowest capacity for investing...
2. Recursion seems magical. I admit it, in college it took me a bit to get Recursion, after a class in LISP it cleared it right up. Also when you get the details realizing how often the system is stacking stuff together means there is a limit on how much Recursion magic you can do.
4. Complex Boolean logic with short circuit evaluation. Yep after that one function returned true that second function won't run in your or clause. You know that one for some reason you made to update some data.
I would hope that LISP class would teach you to avoid side-effects when possible too...
To make a gear, for instance, you might create a wide flat cylinder of the appropriate dimensions and then have a for loop that creates each tooth in the appropriate place. Way easier than trying to hand model all the teeth consistently.
Hand modeling the teeth is just doing it wrong. Even without being able to explicitly program a for loop, most 3d-modeling software ought to let you create a polar array of teeth (in a GUI-driven way).
Everyone knows that if a child can do the software equivalent of drawing with ruler and compass...
You mean like programming in assembly, using a text editor instead of an IDE? FYI, drafting by hand is actually harder than using a CAD program -- you have to still know how to define what you want (dimensioning, tolerances, etc.) but then you also have to have the manual dexterity to draw it without having the software help you fix the proportions and such.
...they're fully qualified to replace a team of those greedy expensive professional programmers on enterprise-level projects.
Furthermore, the Internet as we know it today would not be able to function without CDNs.
"The Internet as we know it today" is worse than it was before CDNs! At least back then it was closer to peer-to-peer with normal users hosting their own content, instead of the glorified TV network we have today...
Because you know that it is only a few years away befoer they start double dipping and not only charging NEtflix for access, but charging the user as well for access to netflix.
They already charge the user for access to Netflix because they charge the user for access to the Internet, which includes Netflix.
Charging Netflix for access is itself double-dipping. Your scenario would be TRIPLE-dipping!
Bah, those new-fangled train drivers aren't real engineers, hardly any of them have ever rolled a petard up to the gate of a fortification while taking fire!
Petard-rollers aren't real engineers; they've never designed the kind of fortification they're trying to blow up. Who has, though? Civil engineers, that's who!
You thought you were pointing out a "no true Scotsman" fallacy on my part, but you failed.
Engineers design systems.
Indeed, they do. My point was that quite a lot of software suffers from a distinct lack of "design;" it's not so much "engineered" as it is "crafted."
It's registered with the state and I get assigned a number. In my book that counts as licensed in the sense of "regulated" for the purpose of this discussion. I'm well aware of the fact that it doesn't give me any special permissions.
Combining the baroque nature of C++ with the overcomplicated Microsoft API and development environment, then packaging that as a beginner programming course? I don't really blame her for needing help!
(As long as we're talking about things like "why can't I get MSBuild to link my project correctly?" and not "what does 'object-oriented' mean?", anyway...)
Slashdot Mirror
My guess is that farmers in rich countries (who can afford things like Monsanto chemicals) expect the lower crop yields to mostly affect other farmers in poor countries, which would lead to higher prices and more profit for the rich countries' farmers.
The farmers in poor countries probably are complaining, of course, but nobody gives a shit about people in poor countries.
That Hideki Moronuki fellow doesn't know what he's talking about: at least in the American case, deer are overpopulated to the point of becoming a pest (mostly because their natural predators, e.g. wolves, are endangered). When there aren't enough interested hunters to go kill them for food or sport, we have to pay people to cull them anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Your response suggests you don't realize that socialism and fascism are but two sides of the same authoritarian coin.
Which isn't particularly relevant, since terrorists operating in the US are statistically most likely to be white US citizens with "American-sounding" names.
Or better yet, don't.
The most appropriate thing for the government to say, Constitutionally speaking, is something like "Oh, you had some sort of religious ceremony? That's fine, but it's completely irrelevant."
But even then state governments still manage to be different from private entities, which is what this Baidu ruling was about.
Baidu may be evil and its policies odious, but (since it isn't a government) it apparently has a right to be so.
Of course, we do also have rulings that things like anti-discrimination laws can be enforced upon businesses, so clearly some limitation of the businesses' free speech is allowed. I could see this ruling being overturned on appeal if the argument is made that allowing a business to censor is similar to allowing a business to discriminate.
And what makes you so certain there's not a market for a service halfway between taxis and buses/subway?
Hence the previous Slashdot stories about schools installing their own root certificates so they can perform MITM attacks...
Yes, just like how someone confessing to a crime while being tortured is perfectly reasonable and valid.
Hey, I like the fall through behavior of switch statements!
Granted, you want a break statement for each case more often than not (and if you're using an IDE, then I think it's reasonable that it should insert one for your automatically), but there are plenty of circumstances where it's a good idea to have a group of cases that all do the same thing, or where you want to do case A and B's actions for case B, etc.
You mean how AMD's unified GPU & CPU chips are designed? (The PS4 uses an AMD processor, and I believe that Sony had much less design influence it than it did on Cell.)
Yes, it seems like nVidia might finally be starting to slowly catch up...
The bottom line is really simple: increasing automation means that a larger percentage of production comes from capital, and less from labor. Ubiquitous automation means that nearly all production comes from capital, and almost none from labor.
The consequence of this is that everyone who derives their income from labor rather than return on capital is screwed. There are only two choices: invest enough to become financially independent (and hope that you can do it before you lose your career to automation), or hope that society sees fit to redistribute wealth so that those without control of capital don't starve.
The catch-22 is that the people whose occupations are most in danger from automation are also those with the lowest capacity for investing...
I would hope that LISP class would teach you to avoid side-effects when possible too...
Hand modeling the teeth is just doing it wrong. Even without being able to explicitly program a for loop, most 3d-modeling software ought to let you create a polar array of teeth (in a GUI-driven way).
You mean like programming in assembly, using a text editor instead of an IDE? FYI, drafting by hand is actually harder than using a CAD program -- you have to still know how to define what you want (dimensioning, tolerances, etc.) but then you also have to have the manual dexterity to draw it without having the software help you fix the proportions and such.
Yeah, I'd say so!
Obligatory RMS
But why would a script kiddie on some other continent give a shit about any of that?
"The Internet as we know it today" is worse than it was before CDNs! At least back then it was closer to peer-to-peer with normal users hosting their own content, instead of the glorified TV network we have today...
They already charge the user for access to Netflix because they charge the user for access to the Internet, which includes Netflix.
Charging Netflix for access is itself double-dipping. Your scenario would be TRIPLE-dipping!
But if the attack fighters can't fight because they're configured to destroy ground targets, then why not just use bombers instead?
Yeah, I know -- I only wrote the "petard-rollers aren't real engineers" part to continue your refrain; I didn't really mean it.
You have to admit, though, that a petard barely counts (as opposed to something like a ballista, trebuchet or siege tower).
Petard-rollers aren't real engineers; they've never designed the kind of fortification they're trying to blow up. Who has, though? Civil engineers, that's who!
You thought you were pointing out a "no true Scotsman" fallacy on my part, but you failed.
Indeed, they do. My point was that quite a lot of software suffers from a distinct lack of "design;" it's not so much "engineered" as it is "crafted."
It's registered with the state and I get assigned a number. In my book that counts as licensed in the sense of "regulated" for the purpose of this discussion. I'm well aware of the fact that it doesn't give me any special permissions.
Combining the baroque nature of C++ with the overcomplicated Microsoft API and development environment, then packaging that as a beginner programming course? I don't really blame her for needing help!
(As long as we're talking about things like "why can't I get MSBuild to link my project correctly?" and not "what does 'object-oriented' mean?", anyway...)