You don't know about Kernighan & Ritchie at Bell labs? Seriously?
!? what does that have to do with what i wrote?
i have not read anything in computing history, that can justify following too broad generalizations made in the comment to which i replied. -that other nations when they caught up to usa it industry, "chose more modern languages". -that in usa "many places were stuck with C and C++" just because they are in usa.
instead it is clear that lot of c and c++ work does take place outside usa. and it is nature of use that determines language. and if there is selection of language based on country, that has more to do with what most developers do in that country.
-
P.S. Shift key. Heard of it?
aesthetics, grammar, spelling, etc., refuge of the logically deficient.
C and C++ are used more in the U.S. because at one point in time, the U.S. was the only country using those languages. It took other nations to catch up with our IT industry, and when they did they chose more modern languages (I suspect Java and C# are the most popular), while in the U.S. many places were stuck with C and C++.
that may be(i really don't know, and i haven't seen any computing history book that make those claims).
but in my humble opinion, ones gets a more fundamental understanding of computer programming and computers by studying c and c++ (or just c actually) than java or any other "modern languages", that are "easier", abstract, and yes, more useful, in some situations .
if one want to understand, and not just use, one should study c. perhaps assembly too. if one's mindset it geared for breaking things apart and perhaps putting them back, and not just build using others' tools, one may prefer c.
this is not science; we have no firm idea how "disease" or drug works, but let us try it anyway to see whether it will work.
this is like old traditional medicine. you have diseases, and you have cures, tried and tested to work in most cases, throughout hundreds of years. explanations for sickness and its cure are usually bogus speculations, about humors, energy balance, etc
it is not science.
but it works, in most cases. so should be allowed . but it can be a slippery road.
If the objective is to mimic human intelligence well enough to be practical...
but that is not the objective of so called artificial intelligence, in spite of its name. what is now referred to as "ai", is just automated data analysis through very fast computers that usually use imprecise algorithms to makes the analysis practical and even faster. they would be vulnerable to lot more stuff. guaranteed.
We've already got people being shot defending their convenience store in an armed robbery.
most people in robbery situations give in to robbers(wisely too). to be technical, relevant significant number here is the number of people killed defending against robbery as a percentage of all robberies involving possible defenders. that is a very small percentage.
as i said there are few people who are naturally predisposed die and kill. but to fight a war effectively, there needs to be tens of thousands willing to do that while doing low level jobs.
as for brand loyalty, unless what they want to die for defines who they are in a deep fundamental level ( as with nationalism , religion, etc ) it wont have the same effect. only brands that even come close are sports teams, and only a very few people get violent for that, even they run away at significant opposition.
i don't get what generations has to do with it , but most tech corps are less than generation old, wont last long. and old corporates, that last tend usually to generate opposite of loyalty.
mercenaries(limited in time and numbers to start with) wont willingly die in large numbers. as such mercenaries will not win wars against motivated enemies willing to do anything for nothing. as government is finding out.
Any one of those companies has enough money to buy an invasion of a small country (and win).
invading is one thing. winning is another. usa's military, with most resources, is getting bent over and spanked by even afgans, iraqis, etc, with ak47s. given the hysterical snowflake melting that even simple memos caused in places like google(not to mention the day after last election ), i doubt any such western company has the ability to withstand few slaps to several of their employees, let alone the kind of spanking usa military is enduring.
bubble of too many silly war movies, games, etc(where huge numbers of grunts willing and fearlessly run in to enemy fire and are willing to kill others ) may have blinded westerners, from the fact that it is not that easy to make men willing to die, and make them kill. only a very few are naturally able to do that. and only slightly higher number willing to do that just for money ( and that for a short time at most). what matters in wars in the end, what matters when it comes to winning, is motivation and morale that make lots and lots of men willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause. i doubt there are many who are willing to die and kill for google or facebook and their billionaire owners.
Not with Trump in charge.
trump if anything is less under the corporate control than others(though they may be beating him down to submission too)
actually new sanctions bill (against north korea, iran and russia ) was opposed by trump administration(on the ground it limited executive branch's ability to conduct diplomacy with flexibility), but was passed with overwhelming(veto proof) bipartisan support by house and senate. https://www.usatoday.com/story...
stop posting uniformed nonsense, stay informed and keep up!
apple really was going out of business for a decade and half, before it had some new ideas, and brought back steve jobs (sacked earlier due to poor performance) to sell them(which is what he was good at), starting with putting an "i" before each brand. if you love apple, hope and pray for some new ideas and new great salesmen. but there is no reason to think that new ideas and salepeople will concentrate there again to such a degree again.
absurd hype(sadly parroted by/.) of this delayed introduction of something already in market through others, indicate the desperation and lack of ideas at apple. apple is now just a marketer of over-hyped, overpriced, mediocre products to its fanboi base, and dependent on 1 such product(iphone) in a mature market for its profitability and survival. sad.
whether this train will live up to its clams over the long run may be in doubt, but china is at least trying to build something, that at very least claims to benefit its citizens. at the same time usa is wasting lot more money and lives continuing unwinnable wars, causing huge destructions and deaths, creating ever more terrorists, directly in contradiction to wishes of american voters, who wanted less foreign entanglements and interventions, and wanted domestic development "first".
"we rule!" ?! state of "ruling" nasa and usa space program- unable to put humans in to space. lots of plans announced with even more spin, with no money to implement them. subsidies to inefficient, over budget, delayed, space and related programs, run by cooperate welfare scams owned by cronies. etc.
"Even with Trump " well all of that predates trump. but if all that continues well in to his term, he owns it too.
in other words, cheap automation has, partially, replaced humans, in helping prospective students find the right course. rest about this being similar to "lots of messaging software for communicating with their friends, such as Snapchat, WhatsApp," is just spin. deceptive spin too, since chatting with friends is different from chatting with so called "chatbot", that use databases and data analysis to chat.
this is creating an artificial market with goolag money. probably necessary since space seems not be a profitable venture. when are we going to see actual mining for profit from space? since it is not government funds, no harm in that. besides, goolag gets goodwill of nerds by this gulag soviets were into space too. not that there is any connection.
as copyright periods run out, in next few decades, recordings of music from earlier part of 20th century (and increasingly great quality) will flood the audience. even more than new libre recordings, i think there should be a project to catalog and publish such music to public.
sure. past game data can be analyzed to create better games. nothing new. but what is this "they"? do you mean human data analysts,using same dumb but fast computers? lol
ai - another name for data analysis. this news actually means ibm's deepmind subsidiary got cooperation from blizzard to use their game datasets. rest is hype.
this post seems to have convoluted logic. so called piracy is a function of cost to consumer. as long as searching and downloading, a delayed, usually not ideal, but good enough, quality media through a free resource in internet, is considered less costly, than alleged timeliness, convenience and quality of a subscription service, "piracy" will thrive.
while more subscription services, with separate exclusive offerings , can increase costs, they can also reduce costs. they increase competition for none exclusive material, under competition, from others and "piracy". they may offer plans based on actual quantity of downloads than duration of subscription(removing injustice of people with non very active subscriptions subsidizing more active ones), etc.
"are you really arguing the humans do not adapt, gain knowledge, and progress?" no. where did you get that? lol nor do i say "because someone was wrong early in the process" "forward looking predictions are all wrong or that even the fundamental basis is incorrect" again why do you assume all that?
but i am properly placing "into context" one example of a widespread "wrong prediction from decades ago ".
and in the interest of "study and learning" i am merely drawing attention to validity of skepticism about new speculations (lead post here) given the history of such speculations.
you seem confused. i said what i said, not what you assume i said. clear you mind. be rational! as i said to you in sibling thread where you also got irrational.
may be you should avoid logical holes too by thinking rationally; fact that i have a low id number here does not mean i am old as you irrationally assume. but may be saying that and expecting reason and verifiable facts is "old".
you must know that anyone can construct a pie chart claiming there was no majority of global cooling/new ice age predictions in 70s by simply selecting the inputs. unless all the predictions are taken into account, and they were not on your link which is pretty data and citation free, such a chart is useless.
all the major media in 1970s were predicting a new ice age. there were skeptics, as there are now.
may be in future, similarly, current climate change skeptics' writings, will be cited to rescue the reputation of science, from damage done by global warming alarmists in media.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know about Kernighan & Ritchie at Bell labs? Seriously?
!? what does that have to do with what i wrote?
i have not read anything in computing history, that can justify following too broad generalizations made in the comment to which i replied.
-that other nations when they caught up to usa it industry, "chose more modern languages".
-that in usa "many places were stuck with C and C++" just because they are in usa.
instead it is clear that lot of c and c++ work does take place outside usa. and it is nature of use that determines language. and if there is selection of language based on country, that has more to do with what most developers do in that country.
-
P.S. Shift key. Heard of it?
aesthetics, grammar, spelling, etc., refuge of the logically deficient.
C and C++ are used more in the U.S. because at one point in time, the U.S. was the only country using those languages. It took other nations to catch up with our IT industry, and when they did they chose more modern languages (I suspect Java and C# are the most popular), while in the U.S. many places were stuck with C and C++.
that may be(i really don't know, and i haven't seen any computing history book that make those claims).
but in my humble opinion, ones gets a more fundamental understanding of computer programming and computers by studying c and c++ (or just c actually) than java or any other "modern languages", that are "easier", abstract, and yes, more useful, in some situations .
if one want to understand, and not just use, one should study c. perhaps assembly too.
if one's mindset it geared for breaking things apart and perhaps putting them back, and not just build using others' tools, one may prefer c.
this is not science; we have no firm idea how "disease" or drug works, but let us try it anyway to see whether it will work.
this is like old traditional medicine. you have diseases, and you have cures, tried and tested to work in most cases, throughout hundreds of years. explanations for sickness and its cure are usually bogus speculations, about humors, energy balance, etc
it is not science.
but it works, in most cases. so should be allowed . but it can be a slippery road.
If the objective is to mimic human intelligence well enough to be practical ...
but that is not the objective of so called artificial intelligence, in spite of its name.
what is now referred to as "ai", is just automated data analysis through very fast computers that usually use imprecise algorithms to makes the analysis practical and even faster.
they would be vulnerable to lot more stuff. guaranteed.
We've already got people being shot defending their convenience store in an armed robbery.
most people in robbery situations give in to robbers(wisely too).
to be technical, relevant significant number here is the number of people killed defending against robbery as a percentage of all robberies involving possible defenders. that is a very small percentage.
as i said there are few people who are naturally predisposed die and kill. but to fight a war effectively, there needs to be tens of thousands willing to do that while doing low level jobs.
as for brand loyalty, unless what they want to die for defines who they are in a deep fundamental level ( as with nationalism , religion, etc ) it wont have the same effect. only brands that even come close are sports teams, and only a very few people get violent for that, even they run away at significant opposition.
i don't get what generations has to do with it , but most tech corps are less than generation old, wont last long. and old corporates, that last tend usually to generate opposite of loyalty.
if this is "currency", then so are loyalty points, frequent-flyer miles, etc, etc, and such.
mercenaries(limited in time and numbers to start with) wont willingly die in large numbers. as such mercenaries will not win wars against motivated enemies willing to do anything for nothing. as government is finding out.
Any one of those companies has enough money to buy an invasion of a small country (and win).
invading is one thing. winning is another. usa's military, with most resources, is getting bent over and spanked by even afgans, iraqis, etc, with ak47s. given the hysterical snowflake melting that even simple memos caused in places like google(not to mention the day after last election ), i doubt any such western company has the ability to withstand few slaps to several of their employees, let alone the kind of spanking usa military is enduring.
bubble of too many silly war movies, games, etc(where huge numbers of grunts willing and fearlessly run in to enemy fire and are willing to kill others ) may have blinded westerners, from the fact that it is not that easy to make men willing to die, and make them kill. only a very few are naturally able to do that. and only slightly higher number willing to do that just for money ( and that for a short time at most).
what matters in wars in the end, what matters when it comes to winning, is motivation and morale that make lots and lots of men willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause. i doubt there are many who are willing to die and kill for google or facebook and their billionaire owners.
Not with Trump in charge.
trump if anything is less under the corporate control than others(though they may be beating him down to submission too)
actually new sanctions bill (against north korea, iran and russia ) was opposed by trump administration(on the ground it limited executive branch's ability to conduct diplomacy with flexibility), but was passed with overwhelming(veto proof) bipartisan support by house and senate.
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
stop posting uniformed nonsense, stay informed and keep up!
apple really was going out of business for a decade and half, before it had some new ideas, and brought back steve jobs (sacked earlier due to poor performance) to sell them(which is what he was good at), starting with putting an "i" before each brand.
if you love apple, hope and pray for some new ideas and new great salesmen. but there is no reason to think that new ideas and salepeople will concentrate there again to such a degree again.
absurd hype(sadly parroted by /.) of this delayed introduction of something already in market through others, indicate the desperation and lack of ideas at apple.
apple is now just a marketer of over-hyped, overpriced, mediocre products to its fanboi base, and dependent on 1 such product(iphone) in a mature market for its profitability and survival.
sad.
whether this train will live up to its clams over the long run may be in doubt, but china is at least trying to build something, that at very least claims to benefit its citizens.
at the same time usa is wasting lot more money and lives continuing unwinnable wars, causing huge destructions and deaths, creating ever more terrorists, directly in contradiction to wishes of american voters, who wanted less foreign entanglements and interventions, and wanted domestic development "first".
"we rule!" ?!
state of "ruling" nasa and usa space program-
unable to put humans in to space.
lots of plans announced with even more spin, with no money to implement them.
subsidies to inefficient, over budget, delayed, space and related programs, run by cooperate welfare scams owned by cronies.
etc.
"Even with Trump "
well all of that predates trump. but if all that continues well in to his term, he owns it too.
in other words, cheap automation has, partially, replaced humans, in helping prospective students find the right course.
rest about this being similar to "lots of messaging software for communicating with their friends, such as Snapchat, WhatsApp," is just spin. deceptive spin too, since chatting with friends is different from chatting with so called "chatbot", that use databases and data analysis to chat.
this is creating an artificial market with goolag money. probably necessary since space seems not be a profitable venture. when are we going to see actual mining for profit from space?
since it is not government funds, no harm in that. besides, goolag gets goodwill of nerds by this
gulag soviets were into space too. not that there is any connection.
as copyright periods run out, in next few decades, recordings of music from earlier part of 20th century (and increasingly great quality) will flood the audience.
even more than new libre recordings, i think there should be a project to catalog and publish such music to public.
sure. past game data can be analyzed to create better games. nothing new.
but what is this "they"? do you mean human data analysts,using same dumb but fast computers? lol
ai - another name for data analysis.
this news actually means ibm's deepmind subsidiary got cooperation from blizzard to use their game datasets. rest is hype.
this post seems to have convoluted logic.
so called piracy is a function of cost to consumer. as long as searching and downloading, a delayed, usually not ideal, but good enough, quality media through a free resource in internet, is considered less costly, than alleged timeliness, convenience and quality of a subscription service, "piracy" will thrive.
while more subscription services, with separate exclusive offerings , can increase costs, they can also reduce costs.
they increase competition for none exclusive material, under competition, from others and "piracy".
they may offer plans based on actual quantity of downloads than duration of subscription(removing injustice of people with non very active subscriptions subsidizing more active ones),
etc.
that is just the article on which the ac's link, an abstract, was based.
somebody linked to the same abstract on another site on a sibling thread.
there seems to be a limited number of irrelevant counter argument available.
"are you really arguing the humans do not adapt, gain knowledge, and progress?"
no. where did you get that? lol
nor do i say "because someone was wrong early in the process" "forward looking predictions are all wrong or that even the fundamental basis is incorrect"
again why do you assume all that?
but i am properly placing "into context" one example of a widespread "wrong prediction from decades ago ".
and in the interest of "study and learning" i am merely drawing attention to validity of skepticism about new speculations (lead post here) given the history of such speculations.
who said global warming wasn't "a thing"? read.
i have already addressed the problems with same exact article as your link (though from a different site) in a sibling thread.
-
now if you are the gp ac do provide "citation and link please for your claims."
you seem confused. i said what i said, not what you assume i said. clear you mind. be rational! as i said to you in sibling thread where you also got irrational.
citation and link please for your claims.
may be you should avoid logical holes too by thinking rationally; fact that i have a low id number here does not mean i am old as you irrationally assume. but may be saying that and expecting reason and verifiable facts is "old".
you must know that anyone can construct a pie chart claiming there was no majority of global cooling/new ice age predictions in 70s by simply selecting the inputs. unless all the predictions are taken into account, and they were not on your link which is pretty data and citation free, such a chart is useless.
all the major media in 1970s were predicting a new ice age. there were skeptics, as there are now.
may be in future, similarly, current climate change skeptics' writings, will be cited to rescue the reputation of science, from damage done by global warming alarmists in media.
here is time story on that
http://content.time.com/time/m...
in future when climate change is again about a new ice age, we will have more easily readable links speculating antarctica turning green.