This would have been an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the difference between science and religion. A falsifiable hypothesis thrown out. Instead we have someone "sacked for heresy", giving totally the wrong message.
You'd have better luck just sitting on a corner, well-dressed, holding a sign saying "Wife won't let me spend my own money on beer."
Works even better if you have a dog with you while panhandling. But do have one that looks sad, hungry, and doesn't bite the donors. And have a water dish there so that they know that you're a caring pet owner.
My dog goes pan-handling on his own with a sign that says "owner won't let me spend my own money on cookies".
My bet is that'll just result in bucketloads of replies claiming that it only seems obvious in hindsight. Non-programmers just don't get it.
The problem is that some things really are only obvious in hindisght, requiring lateral thinking. The thing is that only someone who knows the field will know whether something is only obvious in hindsight or a solution that anyone is likely to reach.
However, in the UK, eyes are no longer tested after you do your driving test. So in reality there are many drivers on the roads with substandard vision who have not been tested in decades (I got rear-ended on my bike by one on a straight road, in good visibility, while wearing bright clothing. It was an elderly gentleman who had no corrective lenses - he just ploughed into the back of me). At least when I was in Texas you got an eye test for driving every 4 years, not a "squint at this numberplate" eye test, but one using an optician's machine.
True up to the age of 70, after which it is part of the medical carried out every three years. In theory drivers are responsible for getting their eyes tested and reporting themselves to the DVLA if they cannot see well enough to meet the requirements. In practice many people who think that their site is not good enough and cannot be corrected avoid being tested so that they can continue driving. I even knew someone who drove a 3-wheeler car as he had only passed a mtorcycle test before his eyesight deteriorated.
This won't be a problem in practice until/unless wind power reaches around 10% of generation capacity. I hope it will be an issue eventually, but it is far from it at the moment
At that point (>10%) the wind power generators should be spread over a very large area, reducing the probability that the entire installed base of generators will generate a low output at the same time. There are also other things to consider such as the likelihood that calm days will be sunnier days (not always, but often) therefore somewhat increasing the output from solar power. Combined with a smart grid and other sources of electricity such as nuclear and gas and tidal power there you have a recipe for a coal-free future.
There is also the ability to use pumped/stored hydropower combined with wind power to respond to peak demand or a short time when all other sources of at a low.
True, I have seen analysis that shows that continent sized grids can guarantee supply. The other thing that I think could be explored is variable pricing to large industrial consumers, though this should be put in place as a "green energy discount" - i.e. cheaper than now at times when there is an excess amount. Some industries can time their consumption to take advantage of lower price. I know that in the UK water companies pump water into towers and high-level reservoirs at night when electric demand is low, some of these operations they could delay if there was a daily price variation.
Go does not provide the typical, type-driven notion of subclassing, but it does have the ability to “borrow” pieces of an implementation by embedding types within a struct or interface.
That's interesting. I can see that they have gone full hog with the composition paradigm and given some innovative ways of implementing it. I will really have to take a look at this.
It seems to me that go is almost the direct opposite of Scala. Scala takes the approach that anything that the compiler can possibly infer it should do, regardless of impact on compile time, whereas go takes the approach of designing the language to facilitate fast compile time. Scala draws from the inheritance model - introducing mixins to give a well-defined multiple inheritance pattern - which can get complex. Go eschews inheritance and goes with composition.
I need to take a good look at go, because I am a Scala fan and want to avoid getting locked in to a single way of thinking.
If we're going to add up these costs for coal then we need consider the incidental costs for wind as well. First thing that comes to mind is the 5MW natural gas turbines needed for when the wind does not blow.
This won't be a problem in practice until/unless wind power reaches around 10% of generation capacity. I hope it will be an issue eventually, but it is far from it at the moment
Re:It lacks a lot of things that you would expect
on
Go Version 1 Released
·
· Score: 1
Given what a clusterfuck OOP has been, it's good to see new languages have jumped off the sinking ship. Inheritance makes for bloated, unreadable code. Good code uses composition instead, which means you don't have to spend hours tracking down weird vtable bugs.
In no programming language should you ever have to worry about the vtable, in fact you should only be able to be aware of it in system programming languages. I haven't come across bugs in inheritance since the very early days of C++, when it was implemented as a preprocessor for c.
That said I know that inheritance is one of those things that people disagree on, and thinking that we are better off using composition is a respectable stance. That said, though I would be the first to acknowledge that inheritance can be used to implement bloated, unreadable code, I believe that used correctly it can give very elegant and easy to read solutions.
BTW I meant function overloading rather than operator overloading... but "go" supports neither.
It doesn't need to be periodic. Reaching our current tech levels involved the consumption of a lot of natural resources that aren't easily renewable (such as most of the easily accessible oil). It isn't obvious that if our tech level is pushed back that we could actually have any decent chance of returning to a substantial tech level.
I am not sure about this. Though it appears to be "conventional wisdom" that we will use up all easily reachable resources, in a "second civilisation" they could find a lot of things that are dumped, Certainly for metals, etc there would be a lot of scrap yards. I think the real shortage would be petrochemicals, but if they were unavailable we could have probably gone a long way with alternatives. We probably wouldn't have individual cars for a long while, but wood powered mass-transit, hydro electricity, etc. are certainly possible.
It lacks a lot of things that you would expect
on
Go Version 1 Released
·
· Score: 1
It lacks a lot of things that you would expect, like inheritance and operator overloading. To me this is a step too far, I mean its like going back to the 70s and using straight c almost.
There are belief systems on the planet that would like that, one of which is doing its best to gain nuclear weapons.
Which is worse than the one that already has them? Ever hear of the crusades, the inquisition? It's not like Christians have the best record. The fact that you feel the need to attack Islam for no reason is kind of pathetic.
Its because of this attitude "if anyone in History did it then we should be able to do it with nukes" that I oppose Islamic states getting nukes.
While this discovery is very cool, it may be a very bad sign. One of the most plausible explanations for the Fermi paradox is that intelligent life almost always wipes itself out before it is able to engage in largescale space travel
It doesn't need to wipe itself out. Just bomb itself back to the stone-age periodically. There are belief systems on the planet that would like that, one of which is doing its best to gain nuclear weapons.
"But according to conventional thinking, these worlds shouldn't exist. You see, HIP 11952 is a 'metal-poor star and planetary formation is hindered around stars with low metallicity."
Therefore - Jesus!
Yes obviously this proves that science is wrong, and therefore the only other possible alternative - creation as described in the Bible (King James version of course) must be right. (we may joke but some people really think like this).
They actually say exactly that in the patent itself:
In an effort to gain the advantages conferred by operating on a floating point basis, some prior art systems have attempted to perform floating point through software emulation, but on a fixed point hardware platform. However, this approach is extremely slow, due to the fact that the software emulation relies upon the use of a general purpose CPU...
But as advances in semiconductor and computer technology enable greater processing power and faster speeds; as prices drop; and as graphical applications grow in sophistication and precision, it has been discovered by the present inventors that it is now practical to implement some portions or even the entire rasterization process by hardware in a floating point format.
By the same method I could patent an electric car that has a 500-mile plus range, top speed of over 90mph and a charge time of under an hour. When the hardware catches up (i.e. other people do the real work) I cash in as having invented it. God, what a stupid system. No wonder people want to be lawyers rather than actually invent something - the lawyers can claim to have "invented" it on paper and take the money and credit.
Just because it isn't written on a single sheet of paper doesn't mean there isn't one.
Actually for practical purposes it does. The "unwritten constitution" can be changed and is. All we need is an act of parliament to change the composition of the Lords, change the rules on the duration of parliament, include European rights in UK law, and many more. All these things have happened. In theory if a Prime Minister wants to make himself a lifetime dictator and the parliament agrees we should be protected by the monarch refusing to assent the bill... but are they really above being brought off, threatened or thinking that the New Leader who will bring back the Empire is a good idea?
Private insurance firms requiring them for young drivers in return for a reduced rate of insurance? Sure, but that's the case in the US, Europe, etc as well.
Seriously?
Which insurance company in the US requires people to put black box trackers in cars...even young drivers?
That's new to me...never heard that one before.
No UK companies require it either. Some are trialling policies which are cheaper, the conditions being you have a black box. If you don't want one then get a policy without a discount. From what I've heard most "black box" policies are brought by parents who provide a car and insurance for their kids anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Flash won't be supported in Linux, and isn't supported on IOS. If anything this will be e good boost for HTML5
This would have been an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the difference between science and religion. A falsifiable hypothesis thrown out. Instead we have someone "sacked for heresy", giving totally the wrong message.
My dog goes pan-handling on his own with a sign that says "owner won't let me spend my own money on cookies".
So what's the current exchange rate for dog money?
It has had a recent boost since the Greek economy has gone to the dogs.
If you can find them...
If you need them the'll find you.
You'd have better luck just sitting on a corner, well-dressed, holding a sign saying "Wife won't let me spend my own money on beer."
Works even better if you have a dog with you while panhandling. But do have one that looks sad, hungry, and doesn't bite the donors. And have a water dish there so that they know that you're a caring pet owner.
My dog goes pan-handling on his own with a sign that says "owner won't let me spend my own money on cookies".
My bet is that'll just result in bucketloads of replies claiming that it only seems obvious in hindsight. Non-programmers just don't get it.
The problem is that some things really are only obvious in hindisght, requiring lateral thinking. The thing is that only someone who knows the field will know whether something is only obvious in hindsight or a solution that anyone is likely to reach.
isn't the point that the car is actually driving.
But that would only be legal in Nevada.
For christ's sake, stop talking about the google car! Every time it's mentioned, anywhere, it pushes its release to two years in the future.
People will be driving them for years with "beta" written on the back
However, in the UK, eyes are no longer tested after you do your driving test. So in reality there are many drivers on the roads with substandard vision who have not been tested in decades (I got rear-ended on my bike by one on a straight road, in good visibility, while wearing bright clothing. It was an elderly gentleman who had no corrective lenses - he just ploughed into the back of me). At least when I was in Texas you got an eye test for driving every 4 years, not a "squint at this numberplate" eye test, but one using an optician's machine.
True up to the age of 70, after which it is part of the medical carried out every three years. In theory drivers are responsible for getting their eyes tested and reporting themselves to the DVLA if they cannot see well enough to meet the requirements. In practice many people who think that their site is not good enough and cannot be corrected avoid being tested so that they can continue driving. I even knew someone who drove a 3-wheeler car as he had only passed a mtorcycle test before his eyesight deteriorated.
In the UK you are not allowed to drive unless your eye-sight meets a minimum standard. Is it legal for a 95% blind man to drive in the USA?
This won't be a problem in practice until/unless wind power reaches around 10% of generation capacity. I hope it will be an issue eventually, but it is far from it at the moment
At that point (>10%) the wind power generators should be spread over a very large area, reducing the probability that the entire installed base of generators will generate a low output at the same time. There are also other things to consider such as the likelihood that calm days will be sunnier days (not always, but often) therefore somewhat increasing the output from solar power. Combined with a smart grid and other sources of electricity such as nuclear and gas and tidal power there you have a recipe for a coal-free future.
There is also the ability to use pumped/stored hydropower combined with wind power to respond to peak demand or a short time when all other sources of at a low.
True, I have seen analysis that shows that continent sized grids can guarantee supply. The other thing that I think could be explored is variable pricing to large industrial consumers, though this should be put in place as a "green energy discount" - i.e. cheaper than now at times when there is an excess amount. Some industries can time their consumption to take advantage of lower price. I know that in the UK water companies pump water into towers and high-level reservoirs at night when electric demand is low, some of these operations they could delay if there was a daily price variation.
Going to make for some great domain names! :)
And some interesting work time search results. Imagine:
S+M maximum speed
S+M large payload
S+M security accessories
Take a look at type embedding: http://golang.org/doc/effective_go.html#embedding
Go does not provide the typical, type-driven notion of subclassing, but it does have the ability to “borrow” pieces of an implementation by embedding types within a struct or interface.
That's interesting. I can see that they have gone full hog with the composition paradigm and given some innovative ways of implementing it. I will really have to take a look at this.
It seems to me that go is almost the direct opposite of Scala. Scala takes the approach that anything that the compiler can possibly infer it should do, regardless of impact on compile time, whereas go takes the approach of designing the language to facilitate fast compile time. Scala draws from the inheritance model - introducing mixins to give a well-defined multiple inheritance pattern - which can get complex. Go eschews inheritance and goes with composition.
I need to take a good look at go, because I am a Scala fan and want to avoid getting locked in to a single way of thinking.
If we're going to add up these costs for coal then we need consider the incidental costs for wind as well. First thing that comes to mind is the 5MW natural gas turbines needed for when the wind does not blow.
This won't be a problem in practice until/unless wind power reaches around 10% of generation capacity. I hope it will be an issue eventually, but it is far from it at the moment
Given what a clusterfuck OOP has been, it's good to see new languages have jumped off the sinking ship. Inheritance makes for bloated, unreadable code. Good code uses composition instead, which means you don't have to spend hours tracking down weird vtable bugs.
In no programming language should you ever have to worry about the vtable, in fact you should only be able to be aware of it in system programming languages. I haven't come across bugs in inheritance since the very early days of C++, when it was implemented as a preprocessor for c.
... but "go" supports neither.
That said I know that inheritance is one of those things that people disagree on, and thinking that we are better off using composition is a respectable stance. That said, though I would be the first to acknowledge that inheritance can be used to implement bloated, unreadable code, I believe that used correctly it can give very elegant and easy to read solutions.
BTW I meant function overloading rather than operator overloading
It doesn't need to be periodic. Reaching our current tech levels involved the consumption of a lot of natural resources that aren't easily renewable (such as most of the easily accessible oil). It isn't obvious that if our tech level is pushed back that we could actually have any decent chance of returning to a substantial tech level.
I am not sure about this. Though it appears to be "conventional wisdom" that we will use up all easily reachable resources, in a "second civilisation" they could find a lot of things that are dumped, Certainly for metals, etc there would be a lot of scrap yards. I think the real shortage would be petrochemicals, but if they were unavailable we could have probably gone a long way with alternatives. We probably wouldn't have individual cars for a long while, but wood powered mass-transit, hydro electricity, etc. are certainly possible.
It lacks a lot of things that you would expect, like inheritance and operator overloading. To me this is a step too far, I mean its like going back to the 70s and using straight c almost.
There are belief systems on the planet that would like that, one of which is doing its best to gain nuclear weapons.
Which is worse than the one that already has them? Ever hear of the crusades, the inquisition? It's not like Christians have the best record. The fact that you feel the need to attack Islam for no reason is kind of pathetic.
Its because of this attitude "if anyone in History did it then we should be able to do it with nukes" that I oppose Islamic states getting nukes.
While this discovery is very cool, it may be a very bad sign. One of the most plausible explanations for the Fermi paradox is that intelligent life almost always wipes itself out before it is able to engage in largescale space travel
It doesn't need to wipe itself out. Just bomb itself back to the stone-age periodically. There are belief systems on the planet that would like that, one of which is doing its best to gain nuclear weapons.
"But according to conventional thinking, these worlds shouldn't exist. You see, HIP 11952 is a 'metal-poor star and planetary formation is hindered around stars with low metallicity ."
Therefore - Jesus!
Yes obviously this proves that science is wrong, and therefore the only other possible alternative - creation as described in the Bible (King James version of course) must be right. (we may joke but some people really think like this).
They actually say exactly that in the patent itself:
In an effort to gain the advantages conferred by operating on a floating point basis, some prior art systems have attempted to perform floating point through software emulation, but on a fixed point hardware platform. However, this approach is extremely slow, due to the fact that the software emulation relies upon the use of a general purpose CPU...
But as advances in semiconductor and computer technology enable greater processing power and faster speeds; as prices drop; and as graphical applications grow in sophistication and precision, it has been discovered by the present inventors that it is now practical to implement some portions or even the entire rasterization process by hardware in a floating point format.
By the same method I could patent an electric car that has a 500-mile plus range, top speed of over 90mph and a charge time of under an hour. When the hardware catches up (i.e. other people do the real work) I cash in as having invented it. God, what a stupid system. No wonder people want to be lawyers rather than actually invent something - the lawyers can claim to have "invented" it on paper and take the money and credit.
At least in the UKoGBaNI?
Yes, but remember he was only a Taffy.
Except the UK has no constitution
Don't be stupid.
Just because it isn't written on a single sheet of paper doesn't mean there isn't one.
Actually for practical purposes it does. The "unwritten constitution" can be changed and is. All we need is an act of parliament to change the composition of the Lords, change the rules on the duration of parliament, include European rights in UK law, and many more. All these things have happened. In theory if a Prime Minister wants to make himself a lifetime dictator and the parliament agrees we should be protected by the monarch refusing to assent the bill ... but are they really above being brought off, threatened or thinking that the New Leader who will bring back the Empire is a good idea?
Seriously?
Which insurance company in the US requires people to put black box trackers in cars...even young drivers?
That's new to me...never heard that one before.
No UK companies require it either. Some are trialling policies which are cheaper, the conditions being you have a black box. If you don't want one then get a policy without a discount. From what I've heard most "black box" policies are brought by parents who provide a car and insurance for their kids anyway.
I played rugby as a kid and never stared at any mans butt. That's only Am Foot.
Only because you had your head squeezed between two of them!