There are also some pretty stupid limitations in C, for example, no access to the "carry" bit. Usually it does not matter, but if it does, embedding assembler is the way to deal with that.
If you do not know assembly, you cannot be a really good coder and you cannot even understand how common attacks on code work these days or why some things run much slower than others. That said, actually coding in assembly is something you only do when there are very good reasons to and mostly as assembly embedded in C.
And there are more good reasons to not do it except in special cases. The primary one is that it makes coding much more expensive, mostly via increased effort in debugging.
Bullshit. A good C-compiler will do as well or better in most cases. For the rare case where it does not, embed assembly for the critical parts. You may also need embedded assembly in drivers, where hardware has to be accessed just right in order to work or work fast.
If a strategy is successful, somebody is going to use it,. no matter how despicable (and yes, sexism is despicable and that it is here used to promote women over men does not make it one bit better).
At this point we can reliably say that women as CEOs are _not_ better than men, unless you want to run a scam, apparently.
People these days want to believe against all sanity. There are no miracles and no mega-geniuses. Science done right is very slow and almost never revolutionary. Technology is the same.
I.e. people seeing what they expecting to see, not what is there. With the huge egos, (but not nearly as large skills) in people doing Neuro-"Science" these days, I am entirely unsurprised. The grand claims about what they know and how things work have been a dead giveaway for years. Things are not that simple in practice.
Technology like that takes 20-50 year to mature from its "first successful test". That is a historic fact and things have not changed in that regards. What you find however today is a lot of failed technologies where people tried to cut that time short. It does not work.
Indeed. Nobody is that brilliant. The really great ones either made their name using low-hanging fruits (nothing wrong with that, but there are none left these days) or took decades. It is also not about working an insane amount of time. Solid research shows that you can do about 6 hours of solid mental work a day and that is it. But you get these hours only if you do not work many more and take the weekends off. And nobody is exempt from that, even is some huge-ego morons claim they are.
The new thing here is that now women try to promote that faulty self-image as well (see. g.e. Marissa Mayer) and fail, just the same as the men that try it.
That is my take as well. Add youth and inexperience to the mix and possibly entirely misguided advice cheering her on and you have the makings of a disaster even with a good idea to start with. The thing is, a successful lab demonstration takes quite a while to turn into a valid product. 10 years is on the low side, 20 years is more realistic and some things take a lot longer. It takes experience to see that. That experience critically includes the experience of failure.
If it sounds too good to be true, it it almost always is. Nobody at that age has that kind of skills. It takes high potential, will and decades of experience to get to a point where you can make even significantly smaller breakthroughs than claimed here these days. My guess is that the youth-madness that pervades society has made too many people utterly blind to the realities.
Now, I do not actually think she is a fraudster. If she was one, she would have sold the company at the first good offer (and there must have been quite a few if Forbes valued her at 4.5 Billion). I think she had a good idea, but youth and inexperience prevented her to see its limitations and how much ruther R&D was actually required. Add to that, that as a female "wunderkind", she had probably quite a few (not too bright) fans among people with money early on. In essence, she may have gotten funded into failure, when a decade or two of solid research may actually have had some useful results that would have held up in practice.
The other thing that may have been at work here is an almost hysterical search for new heroes that can "make America great again". That one is not going to happen. Everybody successful today is a global actor, even if that is sometimes hard to see.
Unfortunately, this is a rather severe violation of the rule of law and can also be called "corruption", because if Hilary gets elected she will owe Comey some rather big favors. In short, this is the thing that destroys nations and the the US regularly criticizes in other nations as "very bad".
Nobody that is actually critical is threatened by this. I would not be either. But it is important to also provide reasonable working conditions to the average worker, or social peace will be threatened. And they will not know how to deal with this and clamp up in fear. I have seen it happening in a similar situation.
Hahahahaha, you are funny. And stupid (ell, what do you expect from an AC...). Nothing goes faster through the grapevine than people getting fired for unclear or suspicious reasons. And unlike you I actually have evidence of the problem I describe happening. No, I cannot talk about it, I an under NDA.
Initially, yes. Then they will do a whitelist of all the bosses emails. You know like all the security rules do not apply to people high enough in the hierarchy.
Slashdot Mirror
I strongly suspect the job ads counted are for "Assembler and C" or the like, never only assembler.
There are also some pretty stupid limitations in C, for example, no access to the "carry" bit. Usually it does not matter, but if it does, embedding assembler is the way to deal with that.
If you are on an 8 Bit MCU, speed is not that critical, or you would use a larger and faster MCU.
If you do not know assembly, you cannot be a really good coder and you cannot even understand how common attacks on code work these days or why some things run much slower than others. That said, actually coding in assembly is something you only do when there are very good reasons to and mostly as assembly embedded in C.
And there are more good reasons to not do it except in special cases. The primary one is that it makes coding much more expensive, mostly via increased effort in debugging.
Bullshit. A good C-compiler will do as well or better in most cases. For the rare case where it does not, embed assembly for the critical parts. You may also need embedded assembly in drivers, where hardware has to be accessed just right in order to work or work fast.
Obviously there are not enough people with any sense. The average person is a moron more often that not.
Fail! You just produced all illegal porn images of 8x8 pixels b/w as well! I hope you enjoy your lifetime in prison.
It is basically certain that Putin knows this is impossible. What is unclear is what his goals are in making such a demand.
If a strategy is successful, somebody is going to use it,. no matter how despicable (and yes, sexism is despicable and that it is here used to promote women over men does not make it one bit better).
At this point we can reliably say that women as CEOs are _not_ better than men, unless you want to run a scam, apparently.
AC has delusion, methinks. Or maybe he cleans the offices of the top level....
The two halves of the University are quite different is some regards.
Well, there is one clear reason why there are less female CEOs: There are less female sociopaths. That is not the only reason, of course.
People these days want to believe against all sanity. There are no miracles and no mega-geniuses. Science done right is very slow and almost never revolutionary. Technology is the same.
Glad to see that there is at least one actual scientist in that field. The others seem to be mainly morons with big mouths.
I.e. people seeing what they expecting to see, not what is there. With the huge egos, (but not nearly as large skills) in people doing Neuro-"Science" these days, I am entirely unsurprised. The grand claims about what they know and how things work have been a dead giveaway for years. Things are not that simple in practice.
Technology like that takes 20-50 year to mature from its "first successful test". That is a historic fact and things have not changed in that regards. What you find however today is a lot of failed technologies where people tried to cut that time short. It does not work.
Indeed. Nobody is that brilliant. The really great ones either made their name using low-hanging fruits (nothing wrong with that, but there are none left these days) or took decades. It is also not about working an insane amount of time. Solid research shows that you can do about 6 hours of solid mental work a day and that is it. But you get these hours only if you do not work many more and take the weekends off. And nobody is exempt from that, even is some huge-ego morons claim they are.
The new thing here is that now women try to promote that faulty self-image as well (see. g.e. Marissa Mayer) and fail, just the same as the men that try it.
That is my take as well. Add youth and inexperience to the mix and possibly entirely misguided advice cheering her on and you have the makings of a disaster even with a good idea to start with. The thing is, a successful lab demonstration takes quite a while to turn into a valid product. 10 years is on the low side, 20 years is more realistic and some things take a lot longer. It takes experience to see that. That experience critically includes the experience of failure.
If it sounds too good to be true, it it almost always is. Nobody at that age has that kind of skills. It takes high potential, will and decades of experience to get to a point where you can make even significantly smaller breakthroughs than claimed here these days. My guess is that the youth-madness that pervades society has made too many people utterly blind to the realities.
Now, I do not actually think she is a fraudster. If she was one, she would have sold the company at the first good offer (and there must have been quite a few if Forbes valued her at 4.5 Billion). I think she had a good idea, but youth and inexperience prevented her to see its limitations and how much ruther R&D was actually required. Add to that, that as a female "wunderkind", she had probably quite a few (not too bright) fans among people with money early on. In essence, she may have gotten funded into failure, when a decade or two of solid research may actually have had some useful results that would have held up in practice.
The other thing that may have been at work here is an almost hysterical search for new heroes that can "make America great again". That one is not going to happen. Everybody successful today is a global actor, even if that is sometimes hard to see.
Unfortunately, this is a rather severe violation of the rule of law and can also be called "corruption", because if Hilary gets elected she will owe Comey some rather big favors. In short, this is the thing that destroys nations and the the US regularly criticizes in other nations as "very bad".
The idiot here is you. You have no clue what "AI" today can and cannot do. Your statements are pure fantasy.
Nobody that is actually critical is threatened by this. I would not be either. But it is important to also provide reasonable working conditions to the average worker, or social peace will be threatened. And they will not know how to deal with this and clamp up in fear. I have seen it happening in a similar situation.
Hahahahaha, you are funny. And stupid (ell, what do you expect from an AC...). Nothing goes faster through the grapevine than people getting fired for unclear or suspicious reasons. And unlike you I actually have evidence of the problem I describe happening. No, I cannot talk about it, I an under NDA.
Initially, yes. Then they will do a whitelist of all the bosses emails. You know like all the security rules do not apply to people high enough in the hierarchy.