The new tech could pass on productivity and improved living conditions to the general population, but nobody has figured out how to spread the wealth to consumers: it's bottlenecked at the top for some frustrating reason.
It's winner take most, #2 and #3 do pretty well, but 4 on down get hosed.
Capacity could greatly increase due to automation and a ready supply of 3rd-world labor, but the world economy is not "cycling right" to leverage that potential.
We'll probably have to experiment to figure out how to unjam the economy. Taxing the wealthy, and "helicopter money" are some possibilities.
Inflation is stuck at about 1.8%, but generally a strong economy needs about 2.2% or higher. It's like water pressure in a hydraulic system: too little, and it's sluggish; too much and stuff leaks and breaks. the needle has been hovering left despite low interest rates. Helicopter-money-theory is something that may increase the "money pressure" to a normal level, in part by giving regular consumers money to spend.
Sorry, I don't trust NYpost at all, based on being caught spinning and lying way too many times in the past. I'd bet a paycheck against their general accuracy.
Just because YOU couldn't find a way to concisely code those 10 cases without using lambdas doesn't mean a solution does not exist.
Hu? Or course it means that, you are silly again.
Why are you so sure you can perceive all possible solutions?
It may also be a limitation of the language that prevents alternatives,
What would be an alternative?
I already described an example in the original post: object-level "classes" (on-click example).
Java had the limitation of having no lambdas
And shitty OOP, and still does.
Re: "Just download a random Java program that is GUI heavy..."
I agree such is bloated, but again it's largely because of Java's weak OOP model (possibly resulting in poor GUI API design), NOT an inherent bloat of OOP compared to lambdas.
in JS in Web front ends every second thing is a closure... go figure.
And it sucks. JS also has a poor OOP model/syntax.
as I showed in my code examples,
But you were comparing a very one-to-one translation. If one has better OOP features, the API's often are done differently ALTOGETHER. The bigger picture matters. It's like you are comparing English to Chinese word for word, when the general structure and way of going about saying things can be very different in each language. You are translating trees, not forests.
I've asked multiple people for concrete/realistic/actual examples of lambdas significantly improving things, and either they couldn't produce any, or the API's were poorly designed to begin with (often because the language had sucky OOP).
Now it's quite possible that API design is a subjective thing everyone prefers different approaches. The best API designs I've seen (in my opinion) are NOT helped much by lambdas.
And I apologize for the difficulty in communicating. It's probably something that we'd have to walk through a longer and specific example(s) before a mutual understanding appears. Sometimes Chinese, I mean English, is not sufficient to convey quick meaning alone.
I had an HP all-in-one printer/fax/scanner that took both color and B&W cartridges. When the color cartridge expired date-wise, one would have to confirm a panel notice on EVERY print-job, even if only printing B&W, which was the vast majority of the time. (I made sure the document print set-up selected "B&W only".)
Might as well have purchased a Wells Fargo cartridge.
If you don't mind, the "Java 8" topic is in read-only-archive mode, so I cannot reply to the lambda usefulness thread there.
Just because YOU couldn't find a way to concisely code those 10 cases without using lambdas doesn't mean a solution does not exist.
You not finding X, and X not existing are not necessarily the same thing.
It may also be a limitation of the language that prevents alternatives, and not an inherent limit of OOP itself. I agree that language-specific limitations may not leave one with sufficient non-lambda solutions in many cases.
But that's more or less my original point: that lambda's in Java are work-arounds for Java limitations. You implied they are a more general factoring solution (such as ALL of oop).
But verifying your claim is why I want to see actual production code, or at least a sufficient description of the problem to see if it's an inherent limit of OOP, a language-specific limit, or something else entirely.
All brands have flaws; Apple's flaws just get more press because of their marketing dominance (a two-edged sword). Consumers kind of expect most other brands to suck and break after 2 years, but not Apple.
Apple does want to be known for quality, and usually do focus on that. But sometimes it seems they internally agree to just ignore certain issues.
They could at least make it easier for 3rd-party repair shops to fix such issues, but perhaps doing so would be "legal" evidence of their knowledge of a mass flaw, inviting class-action law-suits.
Thus, there's pressure to pretend like it's not a wide-spread issue, and it puts them in a bind. But they have very deep pockets and don't have the excuse that "we are barely scraping by" that perhaps Sony could use.
They should just byte the bullet and volunteer to repair it for anyone who asks, if they have proof of purchase.
Their capsule design hasn't changed much in 40 odd years. They incrementally improve it based on experience, and it's probably the safest ride out there.
Yes, but China can and does get space tech from Russia NOW.
Russia wants cash and China wants space tech, and they both want to spite the USA. Thus, Russia selling/trading space-tech with China is "natural".
The cat is already out of the bag.
And my mentioning Skylab was not really about Russia, but to illustrate that space-station technology is 40+ years old. Everybody and their dog already knows it. We could have built a space station without using anything new, secret, or special. (Maybe we did, but Congress got irrationally paranoid anyhow and booted China.)
[House Committee claims] documents he stole "have nothing to do with programs impacting individual privacy interests. They instead pertain to military, defense, and intelligence... The report was disputed by Snowden's ACLU-provided attorney [who said] the committee still can't point to any remotely credible evidence that Snowden's disclosures caused harm.
I'll bet the House's rebuttal to ACLU is, "it did, but the harm is too secret to show you."
For example, maybe Putin now has our Roswell technology?
It's okay, we already swiped their 1908 Tunguska Saucer crash tech. Share and share alike.
If China participated, we would have given them LOADS of IP
Example? Space stations have been around since the 1970's (Skylab). It didn't need to contain anything secret. And if it did, why did we allow Russia on-board?
It just doesn't seem logical: You don't need cutting edge to make a station, and IF we by chance DID put cutting edge in for some unknown/silly reason, why let Russia in?
that happens within another 1.5 years, if not sooner.
Slashdot Mirror
The new tech could pass on productivity and improved living conditions to the general population, but nobody has figured out how to spread the wealth to consumers: it's bottlenecked at the top for some frustrating reason.
It's winner take most, #2 and #3 do pretty well, but 4 on down get hosed.
Capacity could greatly increase due to automation and a ready supply of 3rd-world labor, but the world economy is not "cycling right" to leverage that potential.
We'll probably have to experiment to figure out how to unjam the economy. Taxing the wealthy, and "helicopter money" are some possibilities.
Inflation is stuck at about 1.8%, but generally a strong economy needs about 2.2% or higher. It's like water pressure in a hydraulic system: too little, and it's sluggish; too much and stuff leaks and breaks. the needle has been hovering left despite low interest rates. Helicopter-money-theory is something that may increase the "money pressure" to a normal level, in part by giving regular consumers money to spend.
Sorry, I don't trust NYpost at all, based on being caught spinning and lying way too many times in the past. I'd bet a paycheck against their general accuracy.
The Clintons do NOT get income nor salary from the Clinton Foundation.
The Senate? DC politicians are a POOR source of accurate news (either party).
Why are you so sure you can perceive all possible solutions?
I already described an example in the original post: object-level "classes" (on-click example).
And shitty OOP, and still does.
Re: "Just download a random Java program that is GUI heavy..."
I agree such is bloated, but again it's largely because of Java's weak OOP model (possibly resulting in poor GUI API design), NOT an inherent bloat of OOP compared to lambdas.
And it sucks. JS also has a poor OOP model/syntax.
But you were comparing a very one-to-one translation. If one has better OOP features, the API's often are done differently ALTOGETHER. The bigger picture matters. It's like you are comparing English to Chinese word for word, when the general structure and way of going about saying things can be very different in each language. You are translating trees, not forests.
I've asked multiple people for concrete/realistic/actual examples of lambdas significantly improving things, and either they couldn't produce any, or the API's were poorly designed to begin with (often because the language had sucky OOP).
Now it's quite possible that API design is a subjective thing everyone prefers different approaches. The best API designs I've seen (in my opinion) are NOT helped much by lambdas.
And I apologize for the difficulty in communicating. It's probably something that we'd have to walk through a longer and specific example(s) before a mutual understanding appears. Sometimes Chinese, I mean English, is not sufficient to convey quick meaning alone.
Get some evidence in your pocket, dear MindReader.
What the fuck happened to innocent-until-proven-guilty? Personal speculation is free and plentiful on the Webtubes; we have enough of that already.
Don't need to use handcuffs, just install Windows 10 on it.
It's Swiss Army Turtles all the way down
I believe the official cheesy-press standard is number of dental x-rays' worth
I've read it had instruments that could have indirectly detected one.
It's a gum cleaning
Wean the world off Microsoft, Oracle, etc. Billions saved and we stop rewarding sociopaths.
Glowing condoms? Your tiny wanker only emitted 6.
I had an HP all-in-one printer/fax/scanner that took both color and B&W cartridges. When the color cartridge expired date-wise, one would have to confirm a panel notice on EVERY print-job, even if only printing B&W, which was the vast majority of the time. (I made sure the document print set-up selected "B&W only".)
Might as well have purchased a Wells Fargo cartridge.
(Side Topic)
If you don't mind, the "Java 8" topic is in read-only-archive mode, so I cannot reply to the lambda usefulness thread there.
Just because YOU couldn't find a way to concisely code those 10 cases without using lambdas doesn't mean a solution does not exist.
You not finding X, and X not existing are not necessarily the same thing.
It may also be a limitation of the language that prevents alternatives, and not an inherent limit of OOP itself. I agree that language-specific limitations may not leave one with sufficient non-lambda solutions in many cases.
But that's more or less my original point: that lambda's in Java are work-arounds for Java limitations. You implied they are a more general factoring solution (such as ALL of oop).
But verifying your claim is why I want to see actual production code, or at least a sufficient description of the problem to see if it's an inherent limit of OOP, a language-specific limit, or something else entirely.
The devil is in the details.
Your last reply for reference:
https://developers.slashdot.or...
All brands have flaws; Apple's flaws just get more press because of their marketing dominance (a two-edged sword). Consumers kind of expect most other brands to suck and break after 2 years, but not Apple.
Apple does want to be known for quality, and usually do focus on that. But sometimes it seems they internally agree to just ignore certain issues.
They could at least make it easier for 3rd-party repair shops to fix such issues, but perhaps doing so would be "legal" evidence of their knowledge of a mass flaw, inviting class-action law-suits.
Thus, there's pressure to pretend like it's not a wide-spread issue, and it puts them in a bind. But they have very deep pockets and don't have the excuse that "we are barely scraping by" that perhaps Sony could use.
They should just byte the bullet and volunteer to repair it for anyone who asks, if they have proof of purchase.
Jobs: "You are sticking your finger in the wrong place."
Katz: "It's not easy impersonating Elon, I had to blow up 3 rockets to do it."
Their capsule design hasn't changed much in 40 odd years. They incrementally improve it based on experience, and it's probably the safest ride out there.
K.I.S.S. + patience
Yes, but China can and does get space tech from Russia NOW.
Russia wants cash and China wants space tech, and they both want to spite the USA. Thus, Russia selling/trading space-tech with China is "natural".
The cat is already out of the bag.
And my mentioning Skylab was not really about Russia, but to illustrate that space-station technology is 40+ years old. Everybody and their dog already knows it. We could have built a space station without using anything new, secret, or special. (Maybe we did, but Congress got irrationally paranoid anyhow and booted China.)
I'll bet the House's rebuttal to ACLU is, "it did, but the harm is too secret to show you."
For example, maybe Putin now has our Roswell technology?
It's okay, we already swiped their 1908 Tunguska Saucer crash tech. Share and share alike.
- signed Donald, Hillary, Colin, and Barack.
A telegram from the SpaceShark (SNL reference).
Example? Space stations have been around since the 1970's (Skylab). It didn't need to contain anything secret. And if it did, why did we allow Russia on-board?
It just doesn't seem logical: You don't need cutting edge to make a station, and IF we by chance DID put cutting edge in for some unknown/silly reason, why let Russia in?
China asked permission roughly a decade ago IIRC.
GOP has been investigating the hell out of Hillary's emails and boogers for the last 3 years. At least return the favor.
and he'd make the 8-year-old pay for it.