C++ will always be faster if for no other reason than having support for inline assembly.
While yes, technically that means it's assembly, not C++, the ability to drop into a low-level language for those 10 lines of high critical code means that you can easily hand optimize better than any interpreted or JIT language could ever dream. Audio decoding + SSE/MMX = Win.
You sacrifice any chance of portability, but you can make it scream on its native hardware.
No, you're right. Making it easier cripples the next generation of coders. If you don't have enough love of the craft to puzzle your way through a trial by fire, you probably shouldn't be doing it. More to the point - the fundamentals are hard, but once learned you understand why it doesn't make sense to use bubblesort on a million item list, and why iterating a 2-d array in C++ is vastly faster row by row than column by column. When you survive those tests you come out with computing wisdom and the ability to write sensible, useful, responsive code. If you take the easy route, sure maybe you can be a code monkey, but your problem solving abilities will be nil.
Plus a largish number of flares will miss earth completely. I mean there's about 359 degrees of "miss" out there. And most of the "hit" area is a glancing blow at best.
Why bother? If you could generate enough anti-matter to make a decent trigger out of (and contain it) why not just make an antimatter bomb? Matter-anti-matter reactions are something like 50x as powerful as nuclear reactions of the same mass (I forget the exact numbers and am not willing to look it up right now). And all you would need would be a containment vessel and a means to stop containing the anti-matter. Big boom, done.
Oh come now. You don't have to have a social for every job out there. And you don't have to have a social to pay taxes. The IRS is just perfectly happy to issue you a taxpayer ID number and let you file that way. This is ignore the rampant prevalence of cash jobs out there.
I guarantee you the farmer hiring people to harvest his watermelon crop isn't validating socials.
The difference being that death was the expected result. I don't think the analogy holds. They intended to kill *someone* the fact that it was the wrong someone is just unfortunate.
Re:Anyone can sue anyone, merit is not required
on
Falun Gong Sues Cisco
·
· Score: 1
The U.S. certainly has laws to punish its citizens for transgressions abroad (these were implemented primarily to stop the practice of "sex tourism" to places like Thailand that have lower age of consent laws). I wonder how well those would apply to corporations?
On the other hand, if there was a leader-philosopher that explained in a reasoned way why those things - like revenge killings - were not a good idea, people would follow them more often?
You mean, like Jesus? I mean, he was a great moral teacher (this apart from whether you believe in Christian doctrine or not) and a lot of what he said made great sense and would lead to people living harmoniously in society. But then again, most of the great philosophers like Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle, espoused great moral teaching that would have lead to harmonious societies. No one will follow them for their own sake except for a handful of rationalists who are quickly overrun by the rest of humanity going after whatever it can get.
Religion is the tool that equalizes that and gets even the common man to concede that helping to build society may be in his own best interest. No amount of strictly secular thought is going to overcome that impulse in a sufficient percentage of the populace to make a society function properly.
So here's the deal. If you can apply a strictly secular moral code to yourself, then congratulations, go for it. But don't lose sight of the fact that religion is what's keeping the rest of the barbarian hordes from just up and taking all your stuff and leaving you for dead on the side of the road. Even if it's not for you, don't knock it for the other 95% of the population.
Choosing one means having to argue about which one is better for building a better society. Obviously, everyone's going to have a different opinion on that
And there's the problem. Everyone has a different opinion about how best to make society work. Absent an absolute authority figure, who is to say that one moral code or theory is better than any other? Ultimately everyone's personal moral code would boil down to: "get everything that I can for me and screw everyone else". Because anything less is begging to be taken advantage of by people with more sociopathic tendencies.
Now if you introduce the concept of an absolute authority (God) and eternal punishment/reward (hell/heaven) then even some of the sociopaths will take notice out of self interest and try to do those things that would actually benefit society.
I wouldn't be so quick to try to get people to abandon religion. It's helped glue societies together for many years. It only gets epically hosed when people take control of it and replace the ultimate authority with themselves. But I think the good outweighs the harm there, even from a strictly secular rationalist mindset. I mean, Hitler and Stalin didn't need religion to butcher millions. And the ethnic cleansings that we've seen have had *much* more to do with culture than religion.
Eh, I rather suspect they don't really care so much as the net PR gain for pretending to care makes it make sense. I mean, if 85% of your target market for your company doesn't care about the issue, 10% do care, and 5% would be pissed at you for caring, then it makes sense to make a show of caring because it's a net gain in PR terms. You can't please everyone.
His statement is correct, in that your statistical chances of being in even one commercial plane crash is practically 0. So the odds of being in a second commercial plane crash after the first one remains practically 0. The implied dependence is wrong, but the statement itself is not strictly incorrect.
I wouldn't even go that far. Sometimes it's not obvious what you should try clicking on because it's not even apparent that it's a button (I'm looking at YOU Office 2007 Office button of evilness).
I'm a programmer and a sysadmin and when I first started using iDevices (iPod touch, iPhone, iPad specifically) I found the user interfaces to be completely non-obvious. Now, having worked with them for a few months I find it simple enough, but that initial curve is actually fairly steep. Couple that with not wanting to learn new things anyway and no wonder the elderly aren't adopting it.
And fair use makes a pretty wide berth for academic purposes. If you're doing it to teach, instruct, or learn the rights-holders tend to have an uphill fight on their hands. This is specifically because it is understood by the justice system that a great public good is served by allowing academic institutions as much latitude for sharing information as is reasonably possible. So if there is a legitimate academic interest being served, you suddenly have a lot more shelter than if you are some individual downloading songs off of the internet.
Ah, that was the awesome thing about The Kilrathi Saga - mildly rare and targeted Win95, but runs solid under Win7 x64 *without an emulator* (thank you, application compatibility toolkit!). It fixed the speed issues in WC1&2 and let you enjoy WC3 under a modern system as well. I bought a copy off of e-bay a couple years ago for ~$60, well worth it.
I feel that I should point out that if you still have a set of Win 3.1 install disks lying about, you can actually load up Win 3.1 in DosBox and have it run you old windows games in all their 16-bit goodness. You do have to poke around a little for compatible video and sound drivers, but I got CivNet* to work in it when it was hopelessly lost on a 64-bit system otherwise.
*Minus the TCP/IP stuff, so I guess it's really more "Civ" at this point. OTOH, noone else I know would care to play multiplayer with me anyway so meh.
If speed was your concern (read: 3d video gaming on an embedded device) then you were using fixed-point arithmetic anyway. An FP coproc is cool and everything, but straight integer arithmetic will still outperform it.
Yeah, but it's an absurd judgement. You may as well fine him eleventy hojillion dollars because you're not going to see it either way. Kind of like that RIAA case where they got a judgement of $2 million dollars. To what end? It can't be paid by these people.
If you are really a high school teacher, then you are probably teaching at least five classes a day with around 30 students each. That means you have a hundred thirty tests to grade.
Please select the correct answer for the following: 5*30 = ?
Umm...not everyone is an interface developer. And if you're not responsible for integration testing then there may well be any number of positions in a major project that don't require you to deal with a Windows interface, even on the Windows platform where the finished product has its UI in a window!
Ultimately any human powered helicopter would have to have some type of gliding mechanism to be practical. People can put out sustained effort for only so long. But if you make it more like a bicycle where you can coast and rest between bursts of intense activity, then you may really have something. We need to be aiming for a "bicycle of the air" with this, not mimicking what machines typically do for us.
Oh, and fail-safe too. If you get exhausted at 1000 feet up, it needs to gently drift to ground.
Slashdot Mirror
C++ will always be faster if for no other reason than having support for inline assembly.
While yes, technically that means it's assembly, not C++, the ability to drop into a low-level language for those 10 lines of high critical code means that you can easily hand optimize better than any interpreted or JIT language could ever dream. Audio decoding + SSE/MMX = Win.
You sacrifice any chance of portability, but you can make it scream on its native hardware.
No, you're right. Making it easier cripples the next generation of coders. If you don't have enough love of the craft to puzzle your way through a trial by fire, you probably shouldn't be doing it. More to the point - the fundamentals are hard, but once learned you understand why it doesn't make sense to use bubblesort on a million item list, and why iterating a 2-d array in C++ is vastly faster row by row than column by column. When you survive those tests you come out with computing wisdom and the ability to write sensible, useful, responsive code. If you take the easy route, sure maybe you can be a code monkey, but your problem solving abilities will be nil.
Plus a largish number of flares will miss earth completely. I mean there's about 359 degrees of "miss" out there. And most of the "hit" area is a glancing blow at best.
Why bother? If you could generate enough anti-matter to make a decent trigger out of (and contain it) why not just make an antimatter bomb? Matter-anti-matter reactions are something like 50x as powerful as nuclear reactions of the same mass (I forget the exact numbers and am not willing to look it up right now). And all you would need would be a containment vessel and a means to stop containing the anti-matter. Big boom, done.
Oh come now. You don't have to have a social for every job out there. And you don't have to have a social to pay taxes. The IRS is just perfectly happy to issue you a taxpayer ID number and let you file that way. This is ignore the rampant prevalence of cash jobs out there.
I guarantee you the farmer hiring people to harvest his watermelon crop isn't validating socials.
If it didn't before, I'm sure it does now!
The difference being that death was the expected result. I don't think the analogy holds. They intended to kill *someone* the fact that it was the wrong someone is just unfortunate.
The U.S. certainly has laws to punish its citizens for transgressions abroad (these were implemented primarily to stop the practice of "sex tourism" to places like Thailand that have lower age of consent laws). I wonder how well those would apply to corporations?
On the other hand, if there was a leader-philosopher that explained in a reasoned way why those things - like revenge killings - were not a good idea, people would follow them more often?
You mean, like Jesus? I mean, he was a great moral teacher (this apart from whether you believe in Christian doctrine or not) and a lot of what he said made great sense and would lead to people living harmoniously in society. But then again, most of the great philosophers like Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle, espoused great moral teaching that would have lead to harmonious societies. No one will follow them for their own sake except for a handful of rationalists who are quickly overrun by the rest of humanity going after whatever it can get.
Religion is the tool that equalizes that and gets even the common man to concede that helping to build society may be in his own best interest. No amount of strictly secular thought is going to overcome that impulse in a sufficient percentage of the populace to make a society function properly.
So here's the deal. If you can apply a strictly secular moral code to yourself, then congratulations, go for it. But don't lose sight of the fact that religion is what's keeping the rest of the barbarian hordes from just up and taking all your stuff and leaving you for dead on the side of the road. Even if it's not for you, don't knock it for the other 95% of the population.
Choosing one means having to argue about which one is better for building a better society. Obviously, everyone's going to have a different opinion on that
And there's the problem. Everyone has a different opinion about how best to make society work. Absent an absolute authority figure, who is to say that one moral code or theory is better than any other? Ultimately everyone's personal moral code would boil down to: "get everything that I can for me and screw everyone else". Because anything less is begging to be taken advantage of by people with more sociopathic tendencies.
Now if you introduce the concept of an absolute authority (God) and eternal punishment/reward (hell/heaven) then even some of the sociopaths will take notice out of self interest and try to do those things that would actually benefit society.
I wouldn't be so quick to try to get people to abandon religion. It's helped glue societies together for many years. It only gets epically hosed when people take control of it and replace the ultimate authority with themselves. But I think the good outweighs the harm there, even from a strictly secular rationalist mindset. I mean, Hitler and Stalin didn't need religion to butcher millions. And the ethnic cleansings that we've seen have had *much* more to do with culture than religion.
Eh, I rather suspect they don't really care so much as the net PR gain for pretending to care makes it make sense. I mean, if 85% of your target market for your company doesn't care about the issue, 10% do care, and 5% would be pissed at you for caring, then it makes sense to make a show of caring because it's a net gain in PR terms. You can't please everyone.
His statement is correct, in that your statistical chances of being in even one commercial plane crash is practically 0. So the odds of being in a second commercial plane crash after the first one remains practically 0. The implied dependence is wrong, but the statement itself is not strictly incorrect.
I wouldn't even go that far. Sometimes it's not obvious what you should try clicking on because it's not even apparent that it's a button (I'm looking at YOU Office 2007 Office button of evilness).
I'm a programmer and a sysadmin and when I first started using iDevices (iPod touch, iPhone, iPad specifically) I found the user interfaces to be completely non-obvious. Now, having worked with them for a few months I find it simple enough, but that initial curve is actually fairly steep. Couple that with not wanting to learn new things anyway and no wonder the elderly aren't adopting it.
And fair use makes a pretty wide berth for academic purposes. If you're doing it to teach, instruct, or learn the rights-holders tend to have an uphill fight on their hands. This is specifically because it is understood by the justice system that a great public good is served by allowing academic institutions as much latitude for sharing information as is reasonably possible. So if there is a legitimate academic interest being served, you suddenly have a lot more shelter than if you are some individual downloading songs off of the internet.
Ah, that was the awesome thing about The Kilrathi Saga - mildly rare and targeted Win95, but runs solid under Win7 x64 *without an emulator* (thank you, application compatibility toolkit!). It fixed the speed issues in WC1&2 and let you enjoy WC3 under a modern system as well. I bought a copy off of e-bay a couple years ago for ~$60, well worth it.
I feel that I should point out that if you still have a set of Win 3.1 install disks lying about, you can actually load up Win 3.1 in DosBox and have it run you old windows games in all their 16-bit goodness. You do have to poke around a little for compatible video and sound drivers, but I got CivNet* to work in it when it was hopelessly lost on a 64-bit system otherwise.
*Minus the TCP/IP stuff, so I guess it's really more "Civ" at this point. OTOH, noone else I know would care to play multiplayer with me anyway so meh.
If speed was your concern (read: 3d video gaming on an embedded device) then you were using fixed-point arithmetic anyway. An FP coproc is cool and everything, but straight integer arithmetic will still outperform it.
Yeah, but it's an absurd judgement. You may as well fine him eleventy hojillion dollars because you're not going to see it either way. Kind of like that RIAA case where they got a judgement of $2 million dollars. To what end? It can't be paid by these people.
If you are really a high school teacher, then you are probably teaching at least five classes a day with around 30 students each. That means you have a hundred thirty tests to grade.
Please select the correct answer for the following:
5*30 = ?
a. 130
b. 150
c. Squirrel!
d. Irony
Umm...not everyone is an interface developer. And if you're not responsible for integration testing then there may well be any number of positions in a major project that don't require you to deal with a Windows interface, even on the Windows platform where the finished product has its UI in a window!
Or for maximum lulz announce that we are at war with the martians
So...turn the U-shaped track into a mag-lev track...?
Ultimately any human powered helicopter would have to have some type of gliding mechanism to be practical. People can put out sustained effort for only so long. But if you make it more like a bicycle where you can coast and rest between bursts of intense activity, then you may really have something. We need to be aiming for a "bicycle of the air" with this, not mimicking what machines typically do for us.
Oh, and fail-safe too. If you get exhausted at 1000 feet up, it needs to gently drift to ground.
They jumped the shark when their named change to "SyFy" it was the final confirmation that they'd abandoned anything to do with real science fiction.