I hope this ends setting some kind of precedent, where lawyers everywhere are forced to reference the Winklevoss-Zuckerberg case with a straight face. You've obviously never heard of my favorite Supreme Court case, United States v. One Package of Japanese Pessaries.
It's usually used more for correction than clarification. It's like saying "You meant A, but you're wrong. It ought to be B." For example, s/s\/A\/B/s\/A\/B\// replaces "s/A/B" with "s/A/B/".
Often this is meant to be a global operation, so "I like A. A is great." becomes "I like B. B is great."
Sorry, but the parent isn't insightful, it's misinformation. What the article's author is saying is that the Japanese don't make big smiles. You've actually got it backwards.
Japanese people don't spend a lot of time looking into other people's eyes. It makes people very uncomfortable. I've even been recommended, on more than one occasion, to look at someone's chest rather than their face. During conversation, it's important to look away from the other person occasionally. The practice has the odd effect of making Japanese people in Western countries sometimes appear unattentive or uninterested. During meetings at work, I'm often the only one even looking in the direction of the person who's talking.
So, it isn't that Japanese people stare into each other's eyes all the time. His point is that Japanese people (especially the older generation) can be not very expressive about their emotions. Since they don't make big smiles or frowns, grimacing emoticons don't make sense. What little emotion is conveyed through the face is shown in a person's eyes. A greatly exaggerated version of this forms the Japanese smiley.
... Only an idiot, a liar, or a journalist would confuse that with "making us human." An idiot, a liar, and a journalist walked into a bar. He bought a drink, then left.
It doesn't count as democracy when the head of state is deposed and installed by coup and counter-coup. Democracy implies real voting, not "voting with bullets" or "voting by riot." The former generally leads to oligarchy and the latter is just anarchy, right?
kill 32 people with a legally purchased gun. that's the price of freedom.
insult the president. that's the price of freedom.
remove a president. that's the price of freedom.
troll posts on slashdot. that's the price of freedom.
Don Quihote is a discount store here in Japan. Understandably their stores have a windmill theme, but for some reason the Don himself has been turned into a penguin.
... CANT EVEN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PATCH AND A VULNERABILITY...
It's no surprise he can't tell the difference. In this case, the patch is the vulnerability.
Besides, making a mistake while complaining about Microsoft isn't on the same scale as Microsoft releasing a series of bad patches. Did the GP's mistake result in any botnets? More importantly, the GP's mistake doesn't make Microsoft's mistake any less harmful.
Why is it their business what you put in your body?
Because if you turn into a junkie, and if you're using speed or cocaine you will, you're not just going to ruin your own life. Your subsequent lifestyle of leeching, stealing and vagrancy would affect the community to the extent that it needs the right to protect itself. Is it no one else's business if you choose to inject yourself with smallpox?
If you want to legalize drugs, make a better argument. Claiming that you have the right to do whatever you want with your own body isn't insightful at all.
Without taking either side on the issue of whether the government should torture people, I think it's interesting that the constitution disallows cruel and unusual punishment. Torturing suspected terrorists to obtain information is certainly cruel and unusual, but arguably it isn't punishment.
This instance of torture doesn't fulfill the purposes of punishment. It doesn't serve as a deterent to other would-be terrorists and it's difficult to believe that it would have a rehabilitative effect. If waterboarding were a form of punishment, wouldn't it be more widely publicized to fulfill the public's desire for retribution?
Ostensibly, the purpose of waterboarding is to find information that could prevent further terrorist activities, which isn't punitive.
I'd really like to know if they have some special fancy way to truly fill in the gaps of resolution.
Yeah, there are some pretty fancy ways of doing it. The most important thing to realize is that one frame of video looks pretty much like the next one (temporal redundancy), otherwise you wouldn't be able to process it into a moving image. Because of this, there is information about onscreen objects in many frames. You can use this additional data if your motion estimation algorithms are good enough to allow you to find it.
When the grandparent refers to "imagin[ing] what the computer was really doing", he's talking about a mental model that he finds intuitive and that predicts the behaviour and efficiency of a program reasonably well. I doubt that he was imagining the state of each transistor in the machine. If he can imagine that the Pentium II is CISC without being surprised by its behaviour, it probably doesn't freak him out too much.
Object oriented code is harder for him to translate to the model of a computer that is useful for him, so it seems less natural and sensible, and it's probably less fun.
To get back on topic, if Visual Studio encourages code that is difficult for programmers to translate to a low-level model, it's discouraging them from thinking about the computer at a low-level. That might be harmful, but it isn't exactly brain rot, either.
I wasn't clear enough, apparently. To bitwise XOR the pointers, they are cast as unsigned longs. The point is that when a and b are references to the same data (in this case a pointer), then XOR swapping fails.
Why would you go to so much trouble to develop the algorithm? If you need a faster sorting algorithm for business purposes, you would only spend $10M on the project if it was worth $10M to you. If you don't need the algorithm are you merely trying to beat others to patenting it so that you can extract licensing fees from them? For those purely interested in research, an end to software patents isn't going to put universities out of business.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a pet peeve of mine. Ha-i-ku is three syllables.
There's a sign hanging in the restroom here at work, and I just realized it was a haiku.
Isogutomo
kokoro shizukani
te wo soete
soto ni kobosuna
-Matsutake no Tsuyu
Even when hurried
Quiet your heart
Steady with your hand
And don't spill any on the outside
-Mushroom Dew
Beautiful, isn't it? The English version just says, "We aim to please, so please aim."
s/(\s[Aa]) ([AEIOUaeiou])/$1n $2/
It's usually used more for correction than clarification. It's like saying "You meant A, but you're wrong. It ought to be B." For example,
s/s\/A\/B/s\/A\/B\// replaces "s/A/B" with "s/A/B/".
Often this is meant to be a global operation, so "I like A. A is great." becomes "I like B. B is great."
s/cute/annoying/
s/\s([Aa]) ([AEIOUaeiou])/$1n $2/
...yolk of oppression?
Those egg council creeps again? You'd better run, egg!
</stonecutters reference>
Sorry, but the parent isn't insightful, it's misinformation. What the article's author is saying is that the Japanese don't make big smiles. You've actually got it backwards.
Japanese people don't spend a lot of time looking into other people's eyes. It makes people very uncomfortable. I've even been recommended, on more than one occasion, to look at someone's chest rather than their face. During conversation, it's important to look away from the other person occasionally. The practice has the odd effect of making Japanese people in Western countries sometimes appear unattentive or uninterested. During meetings at work, I'm often the only one even looking in the direction of the person who's talking.
So, it isn't that Japanese people stare into each other's eyes all the time. His point is that Japanese people (especially the older generation) can be not very expressive about their emotions. Since they don't make big smiles or frowns, grimacing emoticons don't make sense. What little emotion is conveyed through the face is shown in a person's eyes. A greatly exaggerated version of this forms the Japanese smiley.
... Only an idiot, a liar, or a journalist would confuse that with "making us human." An idiot, a liar, and a journalist walked into a bar. He bought a drink, then left.It doesn't count as democracy when the head of state is deposed and installed by coup and counter-coup. Democracy implies real voting, not "voting with bullets" or "voting by riot." The former generally leads to oligarchy and the latter is just anarchy, right?
insult the president. that's the price of freedom.
remove a president. that's the price of freedom.
troll posts on slashdot. that's the price of freedom.
Don Quihote is a discount store here in Japan. Understandably their stores have a windmill theme, but for some reason the Don himself has been turned into a penguin.
ax^2+bx+c=0( b/2a)^2+c/a=02 -4ac)/(4a^2)=02 a=+-(b^2-4ac)^(1/2)/(4a^2)^(1/2)a c)^(1/2)/2a( b^2-4ac)^(1/2))/2a
x^2+b/a*x+c/a=0
x^2+b/a*x+(b/2a)^2-
#The above step completes the square
(x+b/2a)^2-(b/2a)^2+c/a=0
(x+b/2a)^2-(b^
(x+b/2a)^2=(b^2-4ac)/(4a^2)
x+b/
x+b/2a=+-(b^2-4
x=-b/2a+-(b^2-4ac)^(1/2)/2a
x=(-b+-
It's no surprise he can't tell the difference. In this case, the patch is the vulnerability.
Besides, making a mistake while complaining about Microsoft isn't on the same scale as Microsoft releasing a series of bad patches. Did the GP's mistake result in any botnets? More importantly, the GP's mistake doesn't make Microsoft's mistake any less harmful.
Why is it their business what you put in your body?
Because if you turn into a junkie, and if you're using speed or cocaine you will, you're not just going to ruin your own life. Your subsequent lifestyle of leeching, stealing and vagrancy would affect the community to the extent that it needs the right to protect itself. Is it no one else's business if you choose to inject yourself with smallpox?
If you want to legalize drugs, make a better argument. Claiming that you have the right to do whatever you want with your own body isn't insightful at all.
Without taking either side on the issue of whether the government should torture people, I think it's interesting that the constitution disallows cruel and unusual punishment. Torturing suspected terrorists to obtain information is certainly cruel and unusual, but arguably it isn't punishment.
This instance of torture doesn't fulfill the purposes of punishment. It doesn't serve as a deterent to other would-be terrorists and it's difficult to believe that it would have a rehabilitative effect. If waterboarding were a form of punishment, wouldn't it be more widely publicized to fulfill the public's desire for retribution?
Ostensibly, the purpose of waterboarding is to find information that could prevent further terrorist activities, which isn't punitive.
I'd really like to know if they have some special fancy way to truly fill in the gaps of resolution.
Yeah, there are some pretty fancy ways of doing it. The most important thing to realize is that one frame of video looks pretty much like the next one (temporal redundancy), otherwise you wouldn't be able to process it into a moving image. Because of this, there is information about onscreen objects in many frames. You can use this additional data if your motion estimation algorithms are good enough to allow you to find it.
There goes my dream of getting out of web design and into research. ;-)
Sun can also be appled as a verb.
Don't be silly. It's the fear of people.
"But they both operate in exactly the same fashion!"
Neither the RIAA or the MPAA has blown up buildings full of copyright infringers.
Object oriented code is harder for him to translate to the model of a computer that is useful for him, so it seems less natural and sensible, and it's probably less fun.
To get back on topic, if Visual Studio encourages code that is difficult for programmers to translate to a low-level model, it's discouraging them from thinking about the computer at a low-level. That might be harmful, but it isn't exactly brain rot, either.
Um, 50% of the population is of below average intelligence?
Would you believe 50% of the population is below median intelligence?
I wasn't clear enough, apparently. To bitwise XOR the pointers, they are cast as unsigned longs. The point is that when a and b are references to the same data (in this case a pointer), then XOR swapping fails.
/x *a /x *b /x *a /x *b
Breakpoint 2, _Z4swapRmS_ (a=0xbffffda4, b=0xbffffda4) at temp.c:4
4 a^=b;
(gdb) print
$3 = 0xbffffda0
(gdb) print
$4 = 0xbffffda0
(gdb) step
5 b^=a;
(gdb) print
$5 = 0x0
(gdb) print
$6 = 0x0
The badness happens when a^=b assigns 0 to both a and b because they reference the same word in memory (the unsigned long y in main's stack frame).
#include <stdio.h>
void swap(unsigned long &a,unsigned long &b){
a^=b;
b^=a;
a^=b;
}
int main(int argc,char *argv[]){
int x=1;
unsigned long y=(unsigned long)&x;
swap(y,y);
printf("%d\n",*(int *)y);
return 0;
}
I hope you like reading books.
Why would you go to so much trouble to develop the algorithm? If you need a faster sorting algorithm for business purposes, you would only spend $10M on the project if it was worth $10M to you. If you don't need the algorithm are you merely trying to beat others to patenting it so that you can extract licensing fees from them? For those purely interested in research, an end to software patents isn't going to put universities out of business.