No, we're not going to be releasing Mammoths (even fake ones) into the wild. Because they'd essentially be an invasive species anywhere we dropped them, and screw up what ecosystem we released them into.
Does it matter? With climate change, the arctic regions are already screwed. Adding variables will simply give them a better chance of finding a new balance once the dust settles.
A web site isn't a good medium for discussing the ever shifting nature of game platforms?
Certainly. But what puts the CVG website above, say, Reddit in that regard? There's no obvious way to go from a magazine that's a collection of game reviews to a discussion forum, since the former is made by its staff and the latter by its members. If anything, having a pre-existing brand might make it harder to the perceived need to upkeep said brand by policing and thus limiting the discussion.
the sad news is that by sending out this "manifesto" weev made sure he will always be on a terrorist watchlist and will never fly again.
So what's sad about it? He gets to pretend he's Kinda Big Deal, NSA gets to take its voyeuristic tendencies out on someone who both deserves and likes it, and the rest of us don't have to worry about the little egomaniac going over the edge and imitating his idols.
Why go the unethical route when it just makes you look bad?
Because humans are herd animals, and corporate politics purposefully try to reinforce this - it's what "team building" and "commitment to job" is ultimately all about. This means that getting fired tends to register at the emotional level: you are being banished from your tribe. Add any actual or perceived injustice, and revenge becomes a factor.
Modern economic system is pretty perverse, as far as human needs are concerned, so people caught in it tend to act irrationally.
Given that all companies of any size have lawyers whose job it is to reduce potential legal liability, I'd have to assume that GM is not alone in having such a policy.
I would assume it is, actually. This list is hard to take as anything but an effort to actively hide evidence. The only things it'll accomplish is make any defects seem a result of deliberate conspiracy, rather than a simple error, and lower the bar of evidence needed to show it more likely than not that GM knew about them. In other words, epic fail.
It seems Pointy-Haired Bosses aren't confined ot technical departments.
You can however have a trade agreement without political union. Something the cunts in Brussels don't want.
You mean the dicks in London. Because it's them, not the cunts in Brussels, who opted to partake in political union, rather than stay out and make trade agreements with it.
You're whining your dick decided to enter Brussels cunt and is now expected to pay child support. You could had settled on looking at Brussels boobies instead. But you had to get some after India and the rest of your Imperial harem dumped you since they didn't feel like paying for your upkeep anymore, and now you're having commitment issues in an actual equal relationship, and you still think you're some kind of big deal so you should get special privileges, even as you suck America's dick to make your kid pretend they like you (no they don't, they threw you out of their house, remember?). Grow up, you incestuous codependent voyeyr of a country.
The whole reason for the existence of the EU is so that we can get rid of legislating lots of redundant secondary legislation and get on with implementing policies that matter.
The reason for the existence of the EU is to stop the European countries from starting another world war. That it also makes trade easier is just a nice bonus.
The British government does not want anything which has to do with the EU, especially when it comes to human rights.
American dissidents flee to Russia after exposing their government's crimes and London complains that the continental union is not repressive enough. What a crazy world we live in.
Breaking laws is not wrong. I break as many laws as I can. I take pride in breaking the law. And yet I am a very moral person who cares about others and believes in putting others before myself.
It must be difficult to balance your urge to mug and murder everyone you pass with your compassion for them.
That's what the Founding Terrorists did. They broke the law, defied The King, but they did what they thought was right and based their actions on a well thought out philosophy.
I guess that would be the difference between people who write constitutions and people who write absurd statements on Slashdot. Speaking of which: do you also cheer for the NSA, and wish Nixon was still a president? I'm trying to figure out if you're more like a theme park anarchist or a would-be tyrant.
Oh, yeah... that is the other mistake. "No one's ever gonna look at this code again, so it's okay if it's an incomprehensible, unmaintainable mess. Ship it!".
But that's not what the summary said. It said the code is specific to a particular architecture, and there's considerable effort required to port it to a completely different architecture.
It doesn't matter how neat your C program might be, moving the computations to OpenCL is still going to be a pain.
actually it is easy, people are just whiny lazy asses these days and want everything to be done for them, and presented on a silver platter, paid for by someone else via some 'wealth distribution plan'
What do the sins of the owning class have to do with programming?
Maybe I'm just showing my lack of history but I thought the American colonies were British, you know, the country that beheaded one King for insisting in the divine right of Kings and then gave the boot to his son who also t
I see the trend continues. But at least they were kind enough to click on Submit.
Is there any analysis that shows the rewards of big data are not meeting the risk (ie dismantling the intrinsic built-in trust of a civilised society and the govts we elect to serve us)?
A more cynical person might suggest that dismantling the trust is the reward some people seek. Divide and conquer is an old, venerable tactic used by both current and would-be tyrants everywhere.
The ability to enforce that right goes down significantly if you can't find out about people in your neighborhood who have molested kids in the past (especially given that child molesters have the highest recidivism rate of any major criminal group).
No, it doesn't. What the heck would I do with that information? Go pre-emptively shoot people I think might be dangerous?
Just because we haven't done a great job of enforcing that right in the past doesn't mean that privacy rights magically trump it.
You're the one who seems to think your paranoia trumps actual rights people have.
Not at all. Every institution needs some kind of morality to guide its actions. One can debate whether a particular institution should exist, altough in our current level of development it seems unlikely we could do without military, and of course even in a completely peaceful one we'd still need personnel and equipment for difficult or dangerous missions, such as search and rescue; but once one does, it needs rules about what's desirable or acceptable and what's not.
But then again, I guess posting edgy slogans is less demanding than identifying specific problems, evaluating possible fixes to them, or even discussing the ethics of national defence in general.
Evidence points to this guy having committed armed robbery against other pharmacies on at least 4 other occasions, in addition to drawing a firearm against police officers when caught. Take this into consideration before you start to blame guns, cops etc. for him dying.
Hmm. You left out the 16-year prison sentence the guy already had behind him for "sexual abuse and robbery convictions", which seems odd for someone genuinely defending the police here. You also jump to the rather ridiculous conclusion that there's a "PC leftist crowd" ready to condemn the police for shooting an armed nutcase who pulled a gun on them. Are you simply a troll hoping to initiate a left-right tribal battle over what seems a pretty clear case of a violent career criminal making his final mistake?
That said, we could once again blame the War on Drugs, which makes it profitable to rob damn painkillers at gunpoint. If people who want high could get high legally, and people who want to get completely messed up could do so in licensed places with medical and security staff, we wouldn't have to deal with this kind of shit. Nor would places like Mexico need to deal with their derived problems.
Agreed, and they failed to compare their analysis of various computer process times (cache, memory, hard disk, network, etc.) to various human component times, starting with a single neural pulse.
Their failure goes far deeper than that: they wrote a paper and went on with their business. Presumably they get responses at some point, and then write a response, and so on.
People engage in multiple conversations in vastly different timescales all the time. All it means is that you do something else when waiting for a response. And our current non-intelligent computers have already mastered this art: the very computer I'm writing this on waits a virtual eternity between my keystrokes. And the same goes for disk read/write requests, network requests, etc.
This problem was solved long ago, by man and nature both: just use memory to store the context and interpret the reply in the stored context when it arrives.
Banks, on the other hand...how big do you have to be to push paper?
Very big. Otherwise, why would anyone care about your paper-pushing? A bank needs to be so much bigger than anyone indebted to them that should they go bankrupt, they can eat the loss and not notice it - in other words, the utility of money is linear to the bank in the range of the debt.
The problem is that the same institution handles three different function: facilitating economic exchanges (bill paying), saving, and providing funding. The end result is that them crashing gives the economy a nice one-two followed by a crotch kick.
All this metadata, and yet they couldn't prevent Boston bomber?
To be fair, if the NSA stops all terrorist attacks, then there are no terrorist attacks and NSA faces a threat to its existence. On the other hand, if an attack goes through but the NSA is caught completely unaware, it comes across as incompetent. So it has an incentive to be at the verge of but not quite arresting the perpetrator when an attack happens.
Organizations and institutions behave like organisms: they care first and foremost about their own existence, and rising above that requires some level of enlightenment. That can lead to rather perverse incentives, and explains a lot about their otherwise often irrational-seeming behaviour.
The issue is that by making up a new "right", and creating a new legal standard without any legislation to smooth the rough edges, the European court effectively just took away rights from others, like the right of parents to find out their neighbor is a child molester.
Actually, the right to privacy has long traditions while I've never heard of this supposed right to know about your neighbour's possible criminal history. No rights have been made up or taken away, an existing one was simply adapted to a new environment.
I don't see how a conviction for possessing child porn is irrelevant or outdated.
Who is it relevant for? Vigilantes? Schools and other institutions with legimitate need for this data don't rely on Google to get it, or if they do someone else should also be facing charges.
I really don't see why Joe Average should be able to access anyone's criminal record, which is what this is really about. If you think some crime deserves a punishment lasting for a lifetime, push for it in the legislature. Don't try to circumvent the law by abusing modern technology.
Only thing worse than GOTO statement is COMEFROM statement.
Yet the same people who complain about GOTO because they have to scroll around the source to see what'll happen have no problem with things like object-oriented programming, where it might be literally impossible to figure out what function (out of an unbound set) will actually be called until the code is run.
Slashdot Mirror
Does it matter? With climate change, the arctic regions are already screwed. Adding variables will simply give them a better chance of finding a new balance once the dust settles.
Certainly. But what puts the CVG website above, say, Reddit in that regard? There's no obvious way to go from a magazine that's a collection of game reviews to a discussion forum, since the former is made by its staff and the latter by its members. If anything, having a pre-existing brand might make it harder to the perceived need to upkeep said brand by policing and thus limiting the discussion.
Please explain the difference between "herd" and "pack" and why it is relevant for this discussion?
So what's sad about it? He gets to pretend he's Kinda Big Deal, NSA gets to take its voyeuristic tendencies out on someone who both deserves and likes it, and the rest of us don't have to worry about the little egomaniac going over the edge and imitating his idols.
Because humans are herd animals, and corporate politics purposefully try to reinforce this - it's what "team building" and "commitment to job" is ultimately all about. This means that getting fired tends to register at the emotional level: you are being banished from your tribe. Add any actual or perceived injustice, and revenge becomes a factor.
Modern economic system is pretty perverse, as far as human needs are concerned, so people caught in it tend to act irrationally.
I would assume it is, actually. This list is hard to take as anything but an effort to actively hide evidence. The only things it'll accomplish is make any defects seem a result of deliberate conspiracy, rather than a simple error, and lower the bar of evidence needed to show it more likely than not that GM knew about them. In other words, epic fail.
It seems Pointy-Haired Bosses aren't confined ot technical departments.
You mean the dicks in London. Because it's them, not the cunts in Brussels, who opted to partake in political union, rather than stay out and make trade agreements with it.
You're whining your dick decided to enter Brussels cunt and is now expected to pay child support. You could had settled on looking at Brussels boobies instead. But you had to get some after India and the rest of your Imperial harem dumped you since they didn't feel like paying for your upkeep anymore, and now you're having commitment issues in an actual equal relationship, and you still think you're some kind of big deal so you should get special privileges, even as you suck America's dick to make your kid pretend they like you (no they don't, they threw you out of their house, remember?). Grow up, you incestuous codependent voyeyr of a country.
The reason for the existence of the EU is to stop the European countries from starting another world war. That it also makes trade easier is just a nice bonus.
American dissidents flee to Russia after exposing their government's crimes and London complains that the continental union is not repressive enough. What a crazy world we live in.
It must be difficult to balance your urge to mug and murder everyone you pass with your compassion for them.
I guess that would be the difference between people who write constitutions and people who write absurd statements on Slashdot. Speaking of which: do you also cheer for the NSA, and wish Nixon was still a president? I'm trying to figure out if you're more like a theme park anarchist or a would-be tyrant.
But that's not what the summary said. It said the code is specific to a particular architecture, and there's considerable effort required to port it to a completely different architecture.
It doesn't matter how neat your C program might be, moving the computations to OpenCL is still going to be a pain.
What do the sins of the owning class have to do with programming?
I see the trend continues. But at least they were kind enough to click on Submit.
A more cynical person might suggest that dismantling the trust is the reward some people seek. Divide and conquer is an old, venerable tactic used by both current and would-be tyrants everywhere.
Yes, everyone has a right to physical security.
No, it doesn't. What the heck would I do with that information? Go pre-emptively shoot people I think might be dangerous?
You're the one who seems to think your paranoia trumps actual rights people have.
Not at all. Every institution needs some kind of morality to guide its actions. One can debate whether a particular institution should exist, altough in our current level of development it seems unlikely we could do without military, and of course even in a completely peaceful one we'd still need personnel and equipment for difficult or dangerous missions, such as search and rescue; but once one does, it needs rules about what's desirable or acceptable and what's not.
But then again, I guess posting edgy slogans is less demanding than identifying specific problems, evaluating possible fixes to them, or even discussing the ethics of national defence in general.
Hmm. You left out the 16-year prison sentence the guy already had behind him for "sexual abuse and robbery convictions", which seems odd for someone genuinely defending the police here. You also jump to the rather ridiculous conclusion that there's a "PC leftist crowd" ready to condemn the police for shooting an armed nutcase who pulled a gun on them. Are you simply a troll hoping to initiate a left-right tribal battle over what seems a pretty clear case of a violent career criminal making his final mistake?
That said, we could once again blame the War on Drugs, which makes it profitable to rob damn painkillers at gunpoint. If people who want high could get high legally, and people who want to get completely messed up could do so in licensed places with medical and security staff, we wouldn't have to deal with this kind of shit. Nor would places like Mexico need to deal with their derived problems.
Their failure goes far deeper than that: they wrote a paper and went on with their business. Presumably they get responses at some point, and then write a response, and so on.
People engage in multiple conversations in vastly different timescales all the time. All it means is that you do something else when waiting for a response. And our current non-intelligent computers have already mastered this art: the very computer I'm writing this on waits a virtual eternity between my keystrokes. And the same goes for disk read/write requests, network requests, etc.
This problem was solved long ago, by man and nature both: just use memory to store the context and interpret the reply in the stored context when it arrives.
Very big. Otherwise, why would anyone care about your paper-pushing? A bank needs to be so much bigger than anyone indebted to them that should they go bankrupt, they can eat the loss and not notice it - in other words, the utility of money is linear to the bank in the range of the debt.
The problem is that the same institution handles three different function: facilitating economic exchanges (bill paying), saving, and providing funding. The end result is that them crashing gives the economy a nice one-two followed by a crotch kick.
To be fair, if the NSA stops all terrorist attacks, then there are no terrorist attacks and NSA faces a threat to its existence. On the other hand, if an attack goes through but the NSA is caught completely unaware, it comes across as incompetent. So it has an incentive to be at the verge of but not quite arresting the perpetrator when an attack happens.
Organizations and institutions behave like organisms: they care first and foremost about their own existence, and rising above that requires some level of enlightenment. That can lead to rather perverse incentives, and explains a lot about their otherwise often irrational-seeming behaviour.
A typical file system is a non-relational database. Does that make it NoSQL?
Actually, the right to privacy has long traditions while I've never heard of this supposed right to know about your neighbour's possible criminal history. No rights have been made up or taken away, an existing one was simply adapted to a new environment.
Who is it relevant for? Vigilantes? Schools and other institutions with legimitate need for this data don't rely on Google to get it, or if they do someone else should also be facing charges.
I really don't see why Joe Average should be able to access anyone's criminal record, which is what this is really about. If you think some crime deserves a punishment lasting for a lifetime, push for it in the legislature. Don't try to circumvent the law by abusing modern technology.
Yet the same people who complain about GOTO because they have to scroll around the source to see what'll happen have no problem with things like object-oriented programming, where it might be literally impossible to figure out what function (out of an unbound set) will actually be called until the code is run.
WordStar on DOS may or may not be obsolete, but having a separate machine for it is.
Then again, maybe having to get up and change seats to take a break and go read tvtropes or something is an advantage...