I've heard many times that producing concrete is a huge generator of CO2.
It is. But graphene costs $100 per gram, while concrete costs $100 per tonne. So the price of graphene needs to decline a million-fold before it is in the price range of concrete. For now, using graphene in concrete is a fantasy.
If you want to spend a limited amount of money reducing atmospheric CO2, buying graphene to add to concrete would be one of the stupidest things you could do.
Graphene is currently way too expensive for a bulk product like concrete, but if a big market is available more research will go into mass production techniques. More research should go into reinforcing concrete with other substances as well. I have seen concrete reinforced with peat moss, coconut fibers, and shredded bamboo. These increase tensile strength, and shock absorption, but reduce compressive strength.
"solutions" to what? rent going up? why is that a problem?
Because landlords are evil, and tenants are virtuous victims. Furthermore, victimhood is only available to current residents, not to people that want to live in NYC but can't because affordable housing is not available.
Stop rent control. Stop subsidizing rent. force the system to balance itself, instead.
Try running for NYC public office while saying that. Good luck.
NYC restricts the supply of housing by refusing to issue building permits, so prices are going up. The only solutions are rent control or usage restrictions.
Removing the restrictions on building, and allowing the supply to rise to meet demand is NOT a solution, because the NIMBY voters of NYC would never accept it. They don't want NYC to lose its "small town" neighborhood feeling - and, no, this is not a joke.
You're pointing to a specific outreach program, not to LLVM's entire intern program.
The link points to an ad that is blatantly ILLEGAL under American law.
Prohibited Practices: It is illegal for an employer to publish a job advertisement that shows a preference for or discourages someone from applying for a job because of his or her race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.
My recollection of the movie (which I highly recommend) is that GS lose big time.
I don't think so. The big loser depicted in the movie was Morgan Stanley. Frontpoint, a subsidiary of MS, was shorting housing, but most of MS's bets were in the "wrong" direction. They lost big.
... but not equally. Some are much worse than others. If you were starting a big new project, and expecting to write tens of thousands of lines of code, then Java or C++ would be reasonable choices. Haskell or some other FP language would not. Here is a list of Haskell programs. The list is short, is mostly small programs, and many of them are mathematical utilities, which is a narrow field were FP actually makes sense.
A lot of trading platforms will let you do trades for 0.1% of the value - doesn't sound too prohibitive.
HFTs operate on razor thin net profits, often matching up buyers and sellers and making a tiny profit on the spread. A 0.1% transaction cost is going to squeeze most of them out of the market.
Aren't those guys supposed to be in jail for something?
No. Goldman Sachs didn't need a bailout, and they didn't cause the crash. While everyone else was running up the housing market and pawning subprime mortgages off on Fannie Mae (backed by tax dollars), Goldman Sachs was betting against it, helping to deflate the bubble. If everyone had done what Goldman did, the financial crisis would have never happened.
Programming with pure functions is a great idea that reduces bugs.
Functional programming makes sense for simple things that are inherently stateless. Sqrt(), sin() and cos() have been "pure" functions for as long as there have been compilers. But it does not make sense for things that are inherently stateful, which happens in almost any useful application.
I do it even when I am using oop.
So does everyone else. Many oop apps use simple stateless functions. But if you are actually passing around objects by-value by shoving them onto the call stack, you are taking it way too far.
It is not good in all situations of course, so it is a case of using the right tool for the job.
The whole point of functional programming is to wedge the use of pure functions into places where it is the wrong tool. Otherwise it would be nothing new.
Can you give a single example of "functional programming" providing a better solution than traditional methods?
But do they win money? I have never seen an on-line tournament with money on the table.
but when a human plays drastically better than their rating, the cheating is pretty obvious.
I like to play in parallel with the computer. I decide on my best move, then I look at the move the computer selected, and try to understand why it is better. This technique has improved my game a lot. I tend to focus on responding to my opponent's move, while the computer looks at the entire board and will often make an unrelated move on the other side of the board. I have tried to focus on doing the same. Often the computer will make a move that doesn't make sense... until a dozen moves later. So I have tried to learn to use pattern recognition to see these situations.
Huh? In functional programming, state is passed in the arguments to the functions.
Which means it doesn't scale. At all. Please show me a device driver written in FP. A backtracking parser? A deep-learning engine? Are you going to pass around 200MB tensors with every function call?
Seems like you don't really understand FP.
If you understand it so well, show us your useful applications.
Functional programming was invented by mathematicians who want chicks to think they earn as much money as real coders.
try learning more about functional programming. In my experience, most devs haven't really built anything using FP
Functional programming is a hot topic... yet very little has actually been built using it. That indicates to me that it is just hype. Programming with "pure" functions sounds nice in theory, but the real world has "state", and you don't get far by pretending that it doesn't.
What guarantee is there that other brands/models don't pose security risks as well?
There are no "guarantees" in computer security, only probabilities. You work to minimize risk, but you can't eliminate it.
American devices may have bugs, and they may even have intentional backdoors, but those backdoors are not there at the behest of a foreign government.
Huawei and ZTE need to do more to show that their code is clean. That means external code reviews, and cryptographic signatures to guarantee that the code in the ROM matches the official binary compiled from the certified source.
that's not the same thing as predicting the result of any single sample (movie) from that distribution.
Nobody is making that claim. The predictions only need to be probabilistically correct.
If Studio A makes a dozen movies that are all innovative new content, and Studio B makes a dozen movies that are all formulaic sequels or remakes of past hits, it is very very likely that Studio B will be more profitable, even though you can't predict the success of each individual film. Of course a few original new films will be hits.
Then don't fucking piss on and look down on other people's fields.
Then they shouldn't be forcing their field on me. I don't force English majors to learn differential equations, so why should they force me to write essays on "Shakespeare and the Semicolon"?
As an engineer, I will never be in a position of being "exposed" for being unable to write a good essay about Shakespeare's "Midsummer night's dream". Real life is not like college.
You are also presuming that people cheat because they can't do the work. I think I actually could write a good essay about MSND if I cared to. I just preferred to devote time to things that actually mattered, like my engineering courses.
But it isn't random. Some movies are more likely to be profitable than others. For instance, sequels gross higher than new original movies, and they have more predictable costs since the director, writers, actors, efx guys, etc. have all worked together before. I can say with 99% certainty that the next "Fast and Furious" film will be profitable, as will the next 007 flick, and the next in the Star Wars series.
Kinda like the stock market. You can't make predictions based on past performance.
Making movies is nothing like picking stocks. For movies, past performance is a very good way of predicting future performance.
Nope. The Chinese slogan is "Zhongguo zhizao 2025", which literally means "Manufacture in China 2025".
They are trying to move up the value chain. Currently they manufacture junk sold at Walmart, and import CPUs and commercial aircraft. Their plan is to make their own high end semiconductors and airliners.
By 2025, their biggest import from America is likely to be food, especially soybeans and pork.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard many times that producing concrete is a huge generator of CO2.
It is. But graphene costs $100 per gram, while concrete costs $100 per tonne. So the price of graphene needs to decline a million-fold before it is in the price range of concrete. For now, using graphene in concrete is a fantasy.
If you want to spend a limited amount of money reducing atmospheric CO2, buying graphene to add to concrete would be one of the stupidest things you could do.
And in outlying areas, home building drives up the price of farmland.
And the shortage of farmland drives up the price of off planet O'Neill Cylinders.
Bold claim considering CVD is the only viable way produce graphene.
CVD is not the only way to make graphene.
Graphene is currently way too expensive for a bulk product like concrete, but if a big market is available more research will go into mass production techniques. More research should go into reinforcing concrete with other substances as well. I have seen concrete reinforced with peat moss, coconut fibers, and shredded bamboo. These increase tensile strength, and shock absorption, but reduce compressive strength.
Any retailer that helps out Amazon in any way is dead, already.
It can't be any worse than the Visa-MasterCard monopoly that currently exists.
Best Buy started selling some new Amazon gadget exclusively a few weeks ago. That's the end of them.
What? Best Buy is still in business?
"solutions" to what? rent going up? why is that a problem?
Because landlords are evil, and tenants are virtuous victims. Furthermore, victimhood is only available to current residents, not to people that want to live in NYC but can't because affordable housing is not available.
Stop rent control. Stop subsidizing rent. force the system to balance itself, instead.
Try running for NYC public office while saying that. Good luck.
NYC restricts the supply of housing by refusing to issue building permits, so prices are going up. The only solutions are rent control or usage restrictions.
Removing the restrictions on building, and allowing the supply to rise to meet demand is NOT a solution, because the NIMBY voters of NYC would never accept it. They don't want NYC to lose its "small town" neighborhood feeling - and, no, this is not a joke.
You're pointing to a specific outreach program, not to LLVM's entire intern program.
The link points to an ad that is blatantly ILLEGAL under American law.
Prohibited Practices: It is illegal for an employer to publish a job advertisement that shows a preference for or discourages someone from applying for a job because of his or her race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.
Satellite is just radio on specific frequencies. It's trivial for China to jam it.
Satellite data is line-of-sight, directional, and in the 10 GHz range. Good luck jamming that.
This could be the end of national firewall based censorship. You can't keep Facebook out of a country if citizens can pull data from the sky.
My recollection of the movie (which I highly recommend) is that GS lose big time.
I don't think so. The big loser depicted in the movie was Morgan Stanley. Frontpoint, a subsidiary of MS, was shorting housing, but most of MS's bets were in the "wrong" direction. They lost big.
Every language is like this
... but not equally. Some are much worse than others. If you were starting a big new project, and expecting to write tens of thousands of lines of code, then Java or C++ would be reasonable choices. Haskell or some other FP language would not. Here is a list of Haskell programs. The list is short, is mostly small programs, and many of them are mathematical utilities, which is a narrow field were FP actually makes sense.
A lot of trading platforms will let you do trades for 0.1% of the value - doesn't sound too prohibitive.
HFTs operate on razor thin net profits, often matching up buyers and sellers and making a tiny profit on the spread. A 0.1% transaction cost is going to squeeze most of them out of the market.
Aren't those guys supposed to be in jail for something?
No. Goldman Sachs didn't need a bailout, and they didn't cause the crash. While everyone else was running up the housing market and pawning subprime mortgages off on Fannie Mae (backed by tax dollars), Goldman Sachs was betting against it, helping to deflate the bubble. If everyone had done what Goldman did, the financial crisis would have never happened.
First thought: here come the Bitcoin flash traders.
Flash crashes usually happen inadvertently, usually by fat-fingering a trade. The institutions causing them almost always lose money.
If you are referring to HFTs, it is likely bitcoin markets already have those, but the transaction costs limit the opportunities.
Programming with pure functions is a great idea that reduces bugs.
Functional programming makes sense for simple things that are inherently stateless. Sqrt(), sin() and cos() have been "pure" functions for as long as there have been compilers. But it does not make sense for things that are inherently stateful, which happens in almost any useful application.
I do it even when I am using oop.
So does everyone else. Many oop apps use simple stateless functions. But if you are actually passing around objects by-value by shoving them onto the call stack, you are taking it way too far.
It is not good in all situations of course, so it is a case of using the right tool for the job.
The whole point of functional programming is to wedge the use of pure functions into places where it is the wrong tool. Otherwise it would be nothing new.
Can you give a single example of "functional programming" providing a better solution than traditional methods?
People are already using LeelaZero to cheat
But do they win money? I have never seen an on-line tournament with money on the table.
but when a human plays drastically better than their rating, the cheating is pretty obvious.
I like to play in parallel with the computer. I decide on my best move, then I look at the move the computer selected, and try to understand why it is better. This technique has improved my game a lot. I tend to focus on responding to my opponent's move, while the computer looks at the entire board and will often make an unrelated move on the other side of the board. I have tried to focus on doing the same. Often the computer will make a move that doesn't make sense ... until a dozen moves later. So I have tried to learn to use pattern recognition to see these situations.
Huh? In functional programming, state is passed in the arguments to the functions.
Which means it doesn't scale. At all. Please show me a device driver written in FP. A backtracking parser? A deep-learning engine? Are you going to pass around 200MB tensors with every function call?
Seems like you don't really understand FP.
If you understand it so well, show us your useful applications.
Functional programming was invented by mathematicians who want chicks to think they earn as much money as real coders.
try learning more about functional programming. In my experience, most devs haven't really built anything using FP
Functional programming is a hot topic ... yet very little has actually been built using it. That indicates to me that it is just hype. Programming with "pure" functions sounds nice in theory, but the real world has "state", and you don't get far by pretending that it doesn't.
What guarantee is there that other brands/models don't pose security risks as well?
There are no "guarantees" in computer security, only probabilities. You work to minimize risk, but you can't eliminate it.
American devices may have bugs, and they may even have intentional backdoors, but those backdoors are not there at the behest of a foreign government.
Huawei and ZTE need to do more to show that their code is clean. That means external code reviews, and cryptographic signatures to guarantee that the code in the ROM matches the official binary compiled from the certified source.
that's not the same thing as predicting the result of any single sample (movie) from that distribution.
Nobody is making that claim. The predictions only need to be probabilistically correct.
If Studio A makes a dozen movies that are all innovative new content, and Studio B makes a dozen movies that are all formulaic sequels or remakes of past hits, it is very very likely that Studio B will be more profitable, even though you can't predict the success of each individual film. Of course a few original new films will be hits.
then the profit growth for the company is nearing its end.
Apple has a P/E of 18. Nobody is expecting much profit growth.
The average P/E for the S&P 500 is 24.
Amazon has a P/E of over 300, which means investors are expecting Amazon's profits to soar ten-fold.
Then don't fucking piss on and look down on other people's fields.
Then they shouldn't be forcing their field on me. I don't force English majors to learn differential equations, so why should they force me to write essays on "Shakespeare and the Semicolon"?
As an engineer, I will never be in a position of being "exposed" for being unable to write a good essay about Shakespeare's "Midsummer night's dream". Real life is not like college.
You are also presuming that people cheat because they can't do the work. I think I actually could write a good essay about MSND if I cared to. I just preferred to devote time to things that actually mattered, like my engineering courses.
The reason being is that it's mostly random.
But it isn't random. Some movies are more likely to be profitable than others. For instance, sequels gross higher than new original movies, and they have more predictable costs since the director, writers, actors, efx guys, etc. have all worked together before. I can say with 99% certainty that the next "Fast and Furious" film will be profitable, as will the next 007 flick, and the next in the Star Wars series.
Kinda like the stock market. You can't make predictions based on past performance.
Making movies is nothing like picking stocks. For movies, past performance is a very good way of predicting future performance.
I wonder if something got lost in translation.
Nope. The Chinese slogan is "Zhongguo zhizao 2025", which literally means "Manufacture in China 2025".
They are trying to move up the value chain. Currently they manufacture junk sold at Walmart, and import CPUs and commercial aircraft. Their plan is to make their own high end semiconductors and airliners.
By 2025, their biggest import from America is likely to be food, especially soybeans and pork.