Are you daft? Most places sell soft drinks by some subset of "small", "medium", "large", "extra large", and "American" sizes. They can shrink those at will.
Yes, and these stores typically prominently display the actual dimensions in addition to the trade name (2x4, which I don't think ever includes inches unless you're buying a rough cut or custom cut that actually measures 2" by 4").
I've never been in a Menards, but https://www.menards.com/main/b... clearly shows the actual dimensions, and doesn't indicate that 2x4 refers to inches.
You're fundamentally wrong. "Small" NAND write blocks have 512 bytes intended for user space plus extra (16 bytes in at least some devices, though I think this varies) intended for error correction and other metadata. "Large" NAND write blocks increase both the user capacity and the metadata space.
It's entirely arbitrary that the user addressable space is 512 bytes, and entirely wrong to say that flash devices are inherently based on power-of-two sizes.
That's not nearly enough. Malware like Stuxnet shows how far attackers go to breach air gaps and similar forms of isolation. (SneakerNet is one, sometimes weak, form of air gap.)
They'll put more wear on the roads, probably use more public transport (which is typically subsidized), need as much police support, and presumably need as many schools for their kids. The fire department is a pretty small part of a city budget.
If a city like that gives up half its tax revenues from a major high-rise, how will it pay for schools/police/whatever for half the people in the high rise?
I've been told that there isn't that much "waste, fraud and abuse" to cut -- that governments are pretty efficient at delivering services. Why should high-rise residents need so much less in civil infrastructure than current residents?
Yes, and liability stops with whoever put it in that safety-critical system without assurances from a third party that the software was fit for such use.
Similarly, a lumber yard is not liable if someone is particle board where high-tensile, fire-resistant, waterproof material is indicated.
That's kind of a stupid reason to have periodic status reports, though. It's a good reason to have a current status report, and to update that when the status changes.
Why is it arguably the fastest? I don't believe there are any x86 instructions where the latency is lower for 32-bit arguments than for 64-bit arguments, except perhaps division, which is almost entirely irrelevant because it used so rarely.
There are cases where using smaller types improves throughput, but the number of places that are going to vectorize operations on timestamps can probably be counted on one hand.
This was before they went to work in DC, where it is practically impossible to get a carry license. Should Congress pass a law superceding DC's gun regulations when it comes to Congresscritters (members and their staff)?
Regarding the Second Amendment: It's generally illegal already to use weapons to hurt or threaten someone. It's also already illegal to carelessly fire, or even brandish, a firearm. Creation, sale, and possession of guns can be sharply limited by law. Convictions for various crimes make you lose many or all of your Second Amendment rights, but never your First Amendment rights. That makes for more, and stricter, restrictions than we accept under the First Amendment.
So were you suggesting that some existing, long-accepted, gun safety laws should be considered unconstitutional? If you were suggesting that guns are somehow more protected than speech, don't be coy: be specific about what you think needs to change.
You specifically cited the Old Testament as an example of where the Bible tells Christians to go and kill people who are different. I pointed out that other religions can reject some teachings of their holy books because of what comes later, but that Islam forbids that kind of update. (Technically, Mohammed could update things, but nobody can overrule him, and he is dead, so it is not going to be updated any further.) You then asked if I meant that we should only take the most recent teachings, which is a stupidly modified and truncated version of epistemology I described. That was your straw man.
And, yes, along the way I did inform you that Islam accepts Mohammed and his prophecies as the highest religious authorities, and that the Koran cannot be revised. Some sects of Islam think that the Sunna (stories about his life and other teachings) can be clarified or corrected, some do not. Some sects even deny that there are any inconsistencies within the Koran or between the Koran and Sunna in the first place. Among the sects that do accept inconsistencies, they differ on how to resolve them, but is and always will be a question of which statement from the Koran has the highest precedence -- no other source can replace a single verse of it.
Which is trickier: Building a vault to protect against global warming, and not having its entryway freeze when the surface gets a little warmer, or re-engineering the global economy to reduce GHG emissions without starving more people?
Excuse us skeptics if we think the second one is harder, and that blinding incompetence in the first suggests that the people in question might not do any better on the second.
I want talking about the Bible, simpleton. You decided to replace what I said (that religions besides Islam can update their doctrines and interpretations of things) with the claim that the proper way to interpret religions is to take whatever came most recently. That's called arguing against a straw man. It's rude, and it's a fallacy.
You are referring to various doctrines on how to resolve apparent contradictions within the Qur'an, or between the Qur'an and how Mohammed (reportedly) behaved in life. No notable Islamic doctrine says that anything that came after Mohammed can overrule what he taught and did, which was the point of my earlier comment. Islam teaches that he was the last and final messenger and prophet of God, and that the Qur'an is the literal word of God, so it is impossible for any later authority to supersede them.
That's POSIX, not C, and even there it does not guarantee [u]int64_t exists. As I said, C does not require any exactly sized types. It only mandates the intleast_t and intfast_t types for certain N, not including 64.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you daft? Most places sell soft drinks by some subset of "small", "medium", "large", "extra large", and "American" sizes. They can shrink those at will.
I know, right? These days, who uses powers of two for anything? This is Slashdot, not PowrsOfTwoDot!
... and guess that you're too dumb and lazy to even troll convincingly.
Who should have to specify variances from standard dimensions when a project needs it, the supplier or the customer?
Yes, and these stores typically prominently display the actual dimensions in addition to the trade name (2x4, which I don't think ever includes inches unless you're buying a rough cut or custom cut that actually measures 2" by 4").
I've never been in a Menards, but https://www.menards.com/main/b... clearly shows the actual dimensions, and doesn't indicate that 2x4 refers to inches.
These boards are labeled 2x4s, not 2"-by-4"s. Your imagination is what injected the units into the final product.
You're fundamentally wrong. "Small" NAND write blocks have 512 bytes intended for user space plus extra (16 bytes in at least some devices, though I think this varies) intended for error correction and other metadata. "Large" NAND write blocks increase both the user capacity and the metadata space.
It's entirely arbitrary that the user addressable space is 512 bytes, and entirely wrong to say that flash devices are inherently based on power-of-two sizes.
Slashdot Noun Pile Headline Train Crash Ambiguity Puzzles Readers
That's not nearly enough. Malware like Stuxnet shows how far attackers go to breach air gaps and similar forms of isolation. (SneakerNet is one, sometimes weak, form of air gap.)
They'll put more wear on the roads, probably use more public transport (which is typically subsidized), need as much police support, and presumably need as many schools for their kids. The fire department is a pretty small part of a city budget.
If a city like that gives up half its tax revenues from a major high-rise, how will it pay for schools/police/whatever for half the people in the high rise?
I've been told that there isn't that much "waste, fraud and abuse" to cut -- that governments are pretty efficient at delivering services. Why should high-rise residents need so much less in civil infrastructure than current residents?
Yes, and liability stops with whoever put it in that safety-critical system without assurances from a third party that the software was fit for such use.
Similarly, a lumber yard is not liable if someone is particle board where high-tensile, fire-resistant, waterproof material is indicated.
That's kind of a stupid reason to have periodic status reports, though. It's a good reason to have a current status report, and to update that when the status changes.
Why is it arguably the fastest? I don't believe there are any x86 instructions where the latency is lower for 32-bit arguments than for 64-bit arguments, except perhaps division, which is almost entirely irrelevant because it used so rarely.
There are cases where using smaller types improves throughput, but the number of places that are going to vectorize operations on timestamps can probably be counted on one hand.
What should we conclude about you, from this one comment taken in isolation? That what you "do" is post inane comments on the Internet?
This was before they went to work in DC, where it is practically impossible to get a carry license. Should Congress pass a law superceding DC's gun regulations when it comes to Congresscritters (members and their staff)?
Regarding the Second Amendment: It's generally illegal already to use weapons to hurt or threaten someone. It's also already illegal to carelessly fire, or even brandish, a firearm. Creation, sale, and possession of guns can be sharply limited by law. Convictions for various crimes make you lose many or all of your Second Amendment rights, but never your First Amendment rights. That makes for more, and stricter, restrictions than we accept under the First Amendment.
So were you suggesting that some existing, long-accepted, gun safety laws should be considered unconstitutional? If you were suggesting that guns are somehow more protected than speech, don't be coy: be specific about what you think needs to change.
That's essentially what Angel Raich argued, but the US Supreme Court said disagreed.
You specifically cited the Old Testament as an example of where the Bible tells Christians to go and kill people who are different. I pointed out that other religions can reject some teachings of their holy books because of what comes later, but that Islam forbids that kind of update. (Technically, Mohammed could update things, but nobody can overrule him, and he is dead, so it is not going to be updated any further.) You then asked if I meant that we should only take the most recent teachings, which is a stupidly modified and truncated version of epistemology I described. That was your straw man.
And, yes, along the way I did inform you that Islam accepts Mohammed and his prophecies as the highest religious authorities, and that the Koran cannot be revised. Some sects of Islam think that the Sunna (stories about his life and other teachings) can be clarified or corrected, some do not. Some sects even deny that there are any inconsistencies within the Koran or between the Koran and Sunna in the first place. Among the sects that do accept inconsistencies, they differ on how to resolve them, but is and always will be a question of which statement from the Koran has the highest precedence -- no other source can replace a single verse of it.
Which is trickier: Building a vault to protect against global warming, and not having its entryway freeze when the surface gets a little warmer, or re-engineering the global economy to reduce GHG emissions without starving more people?
Excuse us skeptics if we think the second one is harder, and that blinding incompetence in the first suggests that the people in question might not do any better on the second.
I want talking about the Bible, simpleton. You decided to replace what I said (that religions besides Islam can update their doctrines and interpretations of things) with the claim that the proper way to interpret religions is to take whatever came most recently. That's called arguing against a straw man. It's rude, and it's a fallacy.
You are referring to various doctrines on how to resolve apparent contradictions within the Qur'an, or between the Qur'an and how Mohammed (reportedly) behaved in life. No notable Islamic doctrine says that anything that came after Mohammed can overrule what he taught and did, which was the point of my earlier comment. Islam teaches that he was the last and final messenger and prophet of God, and that the Qur'an is the literal word of God, so it is impossible for any later authority to supersede them.
Cool story, bro. Have you submitted it to thedailywtf?
That's POSIX, not C, and even there it does not guarantee [u]int64_t exists. As I said, C does not require any exactly sized types. It only mandates the intleast_t and intfast_t types for certain N, not including 64.