On average, just 2% of technology workers at seven Silicon Valley companies that have released staffing numbers are black; 3% are Hispanic.
But last year, 4.5% of all new recipients of bachelor's degrees in computer science or computer engineering from prestigious research universities were African American, and 6.5% were Hispanic, according to data from the Computing Research Association.
Comparing one-year graduation numbers to total staff numbers seems like a fallacy.
"With computing, the social element isn't always evident. They ask, 'how am I going to make a difference in the world with a computer science degree?'"
I've never heard someone saying a sentence like this in high school (girls or boys). Anyone?
I wonder if there's any visible impact on torrent traffic from this. Obviously torrents will continue working and many people will just go to another website, but there could still be a small short-term impact. Would be interesting to see.
I did not extrapolate that, I just said that this sentence in the summary does not sound impressive. In fact it should be a given that SHA-X does not suffer from the same vulnerabilities as SHA-X-1.
'Keccak has the added advantage of not being vulnerable in the same ways SHA-2 might be,'
Out of all the ways a hash function could be vulnerable, not being vulnerable to a few of them hardly looks impressive without more context... But what do I know, I'm not a crytographer.
That's bullshit. Reductio ad absurdum means taking a statement to its extreme implications (as your link says), but it does not mean taking a statement and distorting it to say something that it didn't imply.
Indeed. And it's definitely not true that compilers always do a better job of optimizing than humans. Compilers are much better than they used to be, but for certain specific routines they still can't beat an expert Assembly programmer who can try out several strategies in a flexible optimize-benchmark-optimize feedback loop that compilers aren't able to do.
The end game is probably to trick other traders to think there's a real reason the price is going up, as with all bubbles they have ways to profit from it. But that's just my quick guess.
But I cannot give you definite answers, those algorithms are not public. What is public is the knowledge that they have tricks to find out bid information (via flash orders) which is supposed to be secret. All the side talk about volume, liquidity and price manipulation won't change that...
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't explain anything, because it's not true.
Would it be a subsidy? I don't know, depends on the prices they charge, right?
Electrical companies, local governments and perhaps others.
Unless of course electric chargers are installed which can be used to charge any car (for a fee of course).
Weren't most (all?) of those layoffs done at Nokia?
I just think it's funny that you talk about "disposable email accounts" and then seem to value non-AC accounts, as there's any real difference...
A bit of an ironic signature then ;)
I think it was the other way around for me, maybe it's randomizing the order for each instance of the test.
Comparing one-year graduation numbers to total staff numbers seems like a fallacy.
I've never heard someone saying a sentence like this in high school (girls or boys). Anyone?
Are there any actual details of how the bug works?
I wonder if there's any visible impact on torrent traffic from this. Obviously torrents will continue working and many people will just go to another website, but there could still be a small short-term impact. Would be interesting to see.
The base stations that your mobile phone uses to make calls and access the Internet.
Seems a bit early to try this one...
It's a new design, so without further knowledge all we can say is that it replaces "unknown vulnerabilities" with "unknown vulnerabities". Great :P
I did not extrapolate that, I just said that this sentence in the summary does not sound impressive. In fact it should be a given that SHA-X does not suffer from the same vulnerabilities as SHA-X-1.
Oh and thanks for the spell check.
Out of all the ways a hash function could be vulnerable, not being vulnerable to a few of them hardly looks impressive without more context... But what do I know, I'm not a crytographer.
Doesn't seem to stop tons of companies that register obvious and done-to-death stuff in patents...
No, just wrong. They took care of that problem by making sure the potential customers were in the plane, as the summary says.
That's bullshit. Reductio ad absurdum means taking a statement to its extreme implications (as your link says), but it does not mean taking a statement and distorting it to say something that it didn't imply.
Indeed. And it's definitely not true that compilers always do a better job of optimizing than humans. Compilers are much better than they used to be, but for certain specific routines they still can't beat an expert Assembly programmer who can try out several strategies in a flexible optimize-benchmark-optimize feedback loop that compilers aren't able to do.
Perhaps they ported from disassembled binaries and not the original, cleaner and commented source.
If you think wikipedia is only visited by a bunch of intellectuals you must be from another planet...
I though you were joking at first but then I searched around and I found this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10394970
The end game is probably to trick other traders to think there's a real reason the price is going up, as with all bubbles they have ways to profit from it. But that's just my quick guess.
But I cannot give you definite answers, those algorithms are not public. What is public is the knowledge that they have tricks to find out bid information (via flash orders) which is supposed to be secret. All the side talk about volume, liquidity and price manipulation won't change that...