It's hard to assess with statements like that whether the poster is just playing a rhetorical game, or is indeed a complete fucking moron.
No, that isn't hard. Just toss out your false and baseless assumption that you should choose between the two things that there is evidence of. The more likely answer of course is that they're complete fucking morons playing rhetorical games.
You probably "don't get out much" and only shop at stores frequented by low income conservatives.
Even before the ban, lots of higher income people had already figured out that bringing your own bags provides a higher quality experience, with never a ripped bag. And high quality handles, instead of disposable plastic handles that are like little plastic wires when the bag has anything heavy in it.
And of course, liberals of all income levels frequently were bringing their own bags all along.
Your argument about trash bags should really make it obvious, even to you, that you're arguing from entirely within the fringes. The disposable bags are not even large enough to fit a kitchen trash can. It was rather fringe to make do without a regular-size household trash bin and just tie off a bunch of individual bags. More often people were putting trash in the disposable bags just to carry them across the room and drop the bag into another trash bag, and perhaps now they simply walk across the room with the dust pan, and empty it directly into the trash can like they did when they were kids. In the olden days, before there were all these extra bags polluting even the insides of many people's houses.
I can pretty much guarantee I'm not going to rub elbows with you in the line at the grocery store; I don't even shop at Wally World. And the big store I do shop at frequently, customers bag their own groceries 100% of the time; they've been a chain since the `70s and they never even offered the service. They always have given a bag credit to people who bring their own bags, too. You don't realize it, but a lot of people only accept those disposable bags because it is a lot of work to keep some stores from giving you so many of them.
Just assume, for your first reading, that I'm saying something that is literally true, and obviously correct to experts. See if there is a way to parse the words for that to be true. If so, then you understood me. If it sounds like it would be easily dismissed, you probably selected different definitions for the various words I used than the ones that make sense in the context.
So obviously, if you understood what I was saying, and you understand that it is unlikely that you would "automatically translate ISO standards into a working C compiler," then you can understand that just because a standard is also described using the word "specification" does not in any way imply that it is "fully specified."
It is as if I stated that a glass partially empty, or partially full, is not full, and you offered as a refutation a glass that was merely "filled as high as the user intended."
Or arguing that because somebody said 80% is good enough that therefore 80% = 100%. Nope.
The C standard specifies various things, but it does not specify what the most of the features of a compiler even are, much less "fully."
And OTOH, on a daily basis I write data files that describe APIs, and code generators that consume those data files and output C code, and other languages too. IMO it would be moronic to try to write a compiler as a proof of concept for the technique, though. If you want examples, there are lots of parsers that are fully specified and can be fed into generators outping implementations in different languages. That's because in the case of parsers, it is worthwhile to specify things that narrowly. In most cases that is only desirable within the context of in-house tools; things you release would need to be so portable that full specification carries a lot of technical debt into the future. It is a huge investment in the default case; you'd need billions of dollars worth of effort to build a useful compiler that way. And compilers don't have a lot of value, because we already have good compilers.
There is no "demand" to bring your own bags in the requirement to charge 5 cents per bag. It is merely that it forces customers to think about the bags, and when they think about the bags and make a choice, the obvious high quality choice for the consumer to own a bunch of reusable bags.
Reusable bags improve the shopping experience. They're higher quality bags. You can trust the handles. You can trust the bottom. They cost between 50 cents and $2.50, with the standard plastic ones typically selling for 99 cents. For $2.50 we're talking about a cotton tote bag that would cost over $10 if it wasn't being sold as a shopping bag.
I know it seems like a huge luxury that is too expensive for your whole State, and even the neighboring States, but if you try it you might find it is actually a really low cost luxury. And the streets will be cleaner, guaranteed. This is the future of shopping, at least for people not having everything delivered.
They all promised to do this when the law was being voted on, but then after they lost the vote they found out you just keep some bags in the car and there is no way these sorts of lazy people are going to drive to the next city over.
These are mostly people who would drive to the mailbox if the mail carrier didn't bring it to the door.
if the ambient temperature is higher than the rated temperature of the silicon it doesn't matter how many fans you pack in, it's going to die.
The silicon part of the chip won't have problems below 150C; other parts of the package will fail first unless it is a ceramic package or the temperature increase was caused by over-current.
There are 0 toll roads on the planet Venus. Zero (0). Where else would have outside free air temperatures that high, and also have enough gravity for a toll road to make sense?
That said, if the temperature inside the box without a fan would exceed them temperature limits of the [IC package] that does not imply that you can't use fans. When you turn the device on, it is not yet at the thermal steady-state maximum, and fans can reduce the rate of temperature increase. Assuming that you're on planet Earth and the box is mounted in regular outdoor desert air, the ambient air outside the box will always be well below the thermal limits of the package. Therefore, fans will always help. Generally for this type of thing you would wave a "fanless" CPU, and a multiple redundant case fans.
You need to measure the thermal resistance from the semiconductor junction all the way to ambient. Junction to IC case will be in the datasheet; as will the values for the heat sink. Then you calculate heat sink to ambient inside case at min and max air flow, and then inside case to outside. Now you should know exactly how many watts of power your CPU can use within the given temperature envelope.
If you do those calculations you find that if you don't properly ventilate the case, the ambient air temperature will climb to the failure point with even moderate CPU usage, but that low power systems do fine even in extreme environments without fans. What you want is a system that will survive without fans, but then to use case fans anyways because thermal stress reduces the lifespan of the parts. But water cooling is better because water pumps are more reliable than fans.
The person who invents a technology deserves the right to name it, and only a total asshole would ignore their wishes.
That just makes you a pushy asshole. It isn't something true. Nobody deserves to get things from other people that those people didn't agree to give them. And insisting on it doesn't end well.
Anybody can pronounce anything any way they like. That doesn't mean that if you create a data format that you get to determine what society will call it. That is just narcissism. People use his acronym; but choosing an acronym has nothing to do with how people will pronounce it. And if you try to play it like a game and get people to say something you think is funny, they'll usually choose something else.
That's what the local Republicans said here, too, before we passed this at a city level. LOL
We made it illegal to use disposable plastic bags, and legal to give out paper bags, but you're required to charge 5 cents.
See, the money doesn't go to the city. The store keeps the 5 cents. The purpose of the 5 cents to prevent the store from giving it to you unless you wanted it. If the owner of the store hates hippies and doesn't care about the environment, they're still not allowed to give out disposable bags.
The customer won't tolerate being charged for things they didn't want, but if they forgot their reusable bags at home and don't want to buy more, they can still get the paper bag for 5 cents; in which case, they don't care about the 5 cents! It works well at both ends.
I live in a no-disposable-plastic-bag city, and most people pay $1/ea for heavy duty plastic bags. Some I've used hundreds of times, and they're only showing minor wear. None have failed on me, ever.
I do also have a couple cotton ones, in case I want to carry it in a jacket pocket. Luxury.
People against this policy don't realize that they're fighting against having higher quality bags when shopping. They're fighting against luxury, to defend the practice of putting one or two items in a cheap plastic bag.
Everything is packaged before it goes into the bag. There is no need for bags unless you have a quantity of items, in which case those disposable bags suck anyways! Are we really sure their primary purpose wasn't some sort of anti-turtle conspiracy? I mean, as bags, they suck.
If I use 6 reusable bags for a couple weeks of groceries, that would have been like 30 disposable bags if they were allowed. That's how sucky they are as grocery bags.
We did it on a city level, years ago, and it has been great!
The local R's predicted an apocalypse, and also that people would drive to the suburbs to shop so they could get plastic bags. Neither happened. Most people learned to bring shopping bags to the grocery store, and stores learned that the world doesn't end if somebody buys a single item and carries it out the door without a plastic bag.
The streets are cleaner, there is no question about that. In the past, even people who didn't want a plastic bag had a hard time leaving without one. Problem solved. Easy.
That is typical for quality suppliers. If your chips come from a random small fab in Shenzen, probably not.
Across most integrated circuits that are available from multiple vendors, you'll find high quality ones from TI, including automotive and milspec parts.
For ARM in particular, high quality is their thing top to bottom. At the bottom you have MSP432 which is a really cheap microcontroller, but with a better ADC and lower power usage than similar units from other manufacturers; for a few cents more, of course.
They don't make the cheapest or fastest parts, but they make the higher quality version of a broad range of standard parts.
The MSP432-EXP dev board is under $20 and comes with a decent hardware JTAG emulator/programmer that easily replaces an "entry level" one costing a few hundred bucks.
And they're OSS-friendly. Even though they push their own embedded IDE that uses a proprietary compiler, they also support GCC, and most of their stuff works will a regular open toolchain. I found a bug in the boot code for the GCC version of one of their firmware demos, and their support engineers found and provided a work-around in about 4 hours. And I'm just an independent developer!
All of those nice things said, they've rejected 100% of my sample requests. lol
State legislatures have the authority to appoint electors. Voting for them is optional, and is done because States choose to. The Supreme Court isn't going to even take that sort of challenge; it is very very settled law. It is in the Constitution.
The Constitution says:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.
You do have a right to vote on Representatives in the House:
The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.
Or at least, to vote on Electors who choose the Representatives.
But not Senators, those can by selected however the State legislature chooses:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
The SCOTUS is only going to be willing to look at if the Legislature did in fact pass the law that assigns the Electors. There is no challenge to be had there.
The difficult part in any software is figuring out what to build and the overall architecture.
If you find that you've fully specified what the software you're building is supposed to do, you might have also just finished implementing it.
If for some reason that is not true, you should stop everything and write a code generator that accepts your specification as input. That is, if you're really sure that you've actually specified everything already.
Slashdot Mirror
It's hard to assess with statements like that whether the poster is just playing a rhetorical game, or is indeed a complete fucking moron.
No, that isn't hard. Just toss out your false and baseless assumption that you should choose between the two things that there is evidence of. The more likely answer of course is that they're complete fucking morons playing rhetorical games.
There never was a "Pilocene" epoch.
There was so, but it ended when Millennials decided they hate being mammals, and started shaving everything.
You probably "don't get out much" and only shop at stores frequented by low income conservatives.
Even before the ban, lots of higher income people had already figured out that bringing your own bags provides a higher quality experience, with never a ripped bag. And high quality handles, instead of disposable plastic handles that are like little plastic wires when the bag has anything heavy in it.
And of course, liberals of all income levels frequently were bringing their own bags all along.
Your argument about trash bags should really make it obvious, even to you, that you're arguing from entirely within the fringes. The disposable bags are not even large enough to fit a kitchen trash can. It was rather fringe to make do without a regular-size household trash bin and just tie off a bunch of individual bags. More often people were putting trash in the disposable bags just to carry them across the room and drop the bag into another trash bag, and perhaps now they simply walk across the room with the dust pan, and empty it directly into the trash can like they did when they were kids. In the olden days, before there were all these extra bags polluting even the insides of many people's houses.
I can pretty much guarantee I'm not going to rub elbows with you in the line at the grocery store; I don't even shop at Wally World. And the big store I do shop at frequently, customers bag their own groceries 100% of the time; they've been a chain since the `70s and they never even offered the service. They always have given a bag credit to people who bring their own bags, too. You don't realize it, but a lot of people only accept those disposable bags because it is a lot of work to keep some stores from giving you so many of them.
Try harder.
Just assume, for your first reading, that I'm saying something that is literally true, and obviously correct to experts. See if there is a way to parse the words for that to be true. If so, then you understood me. If it sounds like it would be easily dismissed, you probably selected different definitions for the various words I used than the ones that make sense in the context.
So obviously, if you understood what I was saying, and you understand that it is unlikely that you would "automatically translate ISO standards into a working C compiler," then you can understand that just because a standard is also described using the word "specification" does not in any way imply that it is "fully specified."
It is as if I stated that a glass partially empty, or partially full, is not full, and you offered as a refutation a glass that was merely "filled as high as the user intended."
Or arguing that because somebody said 80% is good enough that therefore 80% = 100%. Nope.
The C standard specifies various things, but it does not specify what the most of the features of a compiler even are, much less "fully."
And OTOH, on a daily basis I write data files that describe APIs, and code generators that consume those data files and output C code, and other languages too. IMO it would be moronic to try to write a compiler as a proof of concept for the technique, though. If you want examples, there are lots of parsers that are fully specified and can be fed into generators outping implementations in different languages. That's because in the case of parsers, it is worthwhile to specify things that narrowly. In most cases that is only desirable within the context of in-house tools; things you release would need to be so portable that full specification carries a lot of technical debt into the future. It is a huge investment in the default case; you'd need billions of dollars worth of effort to build a useful compiler that way. And compilers don't have a lot of value, because we already have good compilers.
I'm doing fine today, asshole, and no I don't care that you didn't comprehend my words.
Anybody can pronounce anything any way they like.
Sure, if they want to sound like a moron. We use common definitions and pronunciations for a reason.
And if you really want to sound like a moron, claim that a pronunciation is "common" because it is the one that one guy advocated.
Posted by Anonymous Coward on 04:14 PM March 31st, 2019
There is no "demand" to bring your own bags in the requirement to charge 5 cents per bag. It is merely that it forces customers to think about the bags, and when they think about the bags and make a choice, the obvious high quality choice for the consumer to own a bunch of reusable bags.
Reusable bags improve the shopping experience. They're higher quality bags. You can trust the handles. You can trust the bottom. They cost between 50 cents and $2.50, with the standard plastic ones typically selling for 99 cents. For $2.50 we're talking about a cotton tote bag that would cost over $10 if it wasn't being sold as a shopping bag.
I know it seems like a huge luxury that is too expensive for your whole State, and even the neighboring States, but if you try it you might find it is actually a really low cost luxury. And the streets will be cleaner, guaranteed. This is the future of shopping, at least for people not having everything delivered.
They all promised to do this when the law was being voted on, but then after they lost the vote they found out you just keep some bags in the car and there is no way these sorts of lazy people are going to drive to the next city over.
These are mostly people who would drive to the mailbox if the mail carrier didn't bring it to the door.
If you can't afford reusable bags, or paper bags for 5 cents, I'm gonna call bullshit on the claim that you were "shopping."
Only if by "homeless" you really mean, "feral drug addicts." AKA Zombies.
Regular homeless people don't have hep-C, and don't play in each other's poop anyways.
if the ambient temperature is higher than the rated temperature of the silicon it doesn't matter how many fans you pack in, it's going to die.
The silicon part of the chip won't have problems below 150C; other parts of the package will fail first unless it is a ceramic package or the temperature increase was caused by over-current.
There are 0 toll roads on the planet Venus. Zero (0). Where else would have outside free air temperatures that high, and also have enough gravity for a toll road to make sense?
That said, if the temperature inside the box without a fan would exceed them temperature limits of the [IC package] that does not imply that you can't use fans. When you turn the device on, it is not yet at the thermal steady-state maximum, and fans can reduce the rate of temperature increase. Assuming that you're on planet Earth and the box is mounted in regular outdoor desert air, the ambient air outside the box will always be well below the thermal limits of the package. Therefore, fans will always help. Generally for this type of thing you would wave a "fanless" CPU, and a multiple redundant case fans.
You need to measure the thermal resistance from the semiconductor junction all the way to ambient. Junction to IC case will be in the datasheet; as will the values for the heat sink. Then you calculate heat sink to ambient inside case at min and max air flow, and then inside case to outside. Now you should know exactly how many watts of power your CPU can use within the given temperature envelope.
If you do those calculations you find that if you don't properly ventilate the case, the ambient air temperature will climb to the failure point with even moderate CPU usage, but that low power systems do fine even in extreme environments without fans. What you want is a system that will survive without fans, but then to use case fans anyways because thermal stress reduces the lifespan of the parts. But water cooling is better because water pumps are more reliable than fans.
Don't turn off adblock, silly rabbit! Turn off style sheets. Content will display. They have to for accessibility. ;)
On Firefox that is: View->Page Style->No Style
The person who invents a technology deserves the right to name it, and only a total asshole would ignore their wishes.
That just makes you a pushy asshole. It isn't something true. Nobody deserves to get things from other people that those people didn't agree to give them. And insisting on it doesn't end well.
Anybody can pronounce anything any way they like. That doesn't mean that if you create a data format that you get to determine what society will call it. That is just narcissism. People use his acronym; but choosing an acronym has nothing to do with how people will pronounce it. And if you try to play it like a game and get people to say something you think is funny, they'll usually choose something else.
These helpful substances however are banned from our consumption.
No, they're banned for your consumption. For my consumption, it is legal.
Maybe we voted differently?
Wait, you're an adult, and you're still trying to shame people for being good? WTF?
That's what the local Republicans said here, too, before we passed this at a city level. LOL
We made it illegal to use disposable plastic bags, and legal to give out paper bags, but you're required to charge 5 cents.
See, the money doesn't go to the city. The store keeps the 5 cents. The purpose of the 5 cents to prevent the store from giving it to you unless you wanted it. If the owner of the store hates hippies and doesn't care about the environment, they're still not allowed to give out disposable bags.
The customer won't tolerate being charged for things they didn't want, but if they forgot their reusable bags at home and don't want to buy more, they can still get the paper bag for 5 cents; in which case, they don't care about the 5 cents! It works well at both ends.
I live in a no-disposable-plastic-bag city, and most people pay $1/ea for heavy duty plastic bags. Some I've used hundreds of times, and they're only showing minor wear. None have failed on me, ever.
I do also have a couple cotton ones, in case I want to carry it in a jacket pocket. Luxury.
People against this policy don't realize that they're fighting against having higher quality bags when shopping. They're fighting against luxury, to defend the practice of putting one or two items in a cheap plastic bag.
Everything is packaged before it goes into the bag. There is no need for bags unless you have a quantity of items, in which case those disposable bags suck anyways! Are we really sure their primary purpose wasn't some sort of anti-turtle conspiracy? I mean, as bags, they suck.
If I use 6 reusable bags for a couple weeks of groceries, that would have been like 30 disposable bags if they were allowed. That's how sucky they are as grocery bags.
We did it on a city level, years ago, and it has been great!
The local R's predicted an apocalypse, and also that people would drive to the suburbs to shop so they could get plastic bags. Neither happened. Most people learned to bring shopping bags to the grocery store, and stores learned that the world doesn't end if somebody buys a single item and carries it out the door without a plastic bag.
The streets are cleaner, there is no question about that. In the past, even people who didn't want a plastic bag had a hard time leaving without one. Problem solved. Easy.
That is typical for quality suppliers. If your chips come from a random small fab in Shenzen, probably not.
Across most integrated circuits that are available from multiple vendors, you'll find high quality ones from TI, including automotive and milspec parts.
For ARM in particular, high quality is their thing top to bottom. At the bottom you have MSP432 which is a really cheap microcontroller, but with a better ADC and lower power usage than similar units from other manufacturers; for a few cents more, of course.
They don't make the cheapest or fastest parts, but they make the higher quality version of a broad range of standard parts.
The MSP432-EXP dev board is under $20 and comes with a decent hardware JTAG emulator/programmer that easily replaces an "entry level" one costing a few hundred bucks.
And they're OSS-friendly. Even though they push their own embedded IDE that uses a proprietary compiler, they also support GCC, and most of their stuff works will a regular open toolchain. I found a bug in the boot code for the GCC version of one of their firmware demos, and their support engineers found and provided a work-around in about 4 hours. And I'm just an independent developer!
All of those nice things said, they've rejected 100% of my sample requests. lol
State legislatures have the authority to appoint electors. Voting for them is optional, and is done because States choose to. The Supreme Court isn't going to even take that sort of challenge; it is very very settled law. It is in the Constitution.
The Constitution says:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.
You do have a right to vote on Representatives in the House:
The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.
Or at least, to vote on Electors who choose the Representatives.
But not Senators, those can by selected however the State legislature chooses:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
The SCOTUS is only going to be willing to look at if the Legislature did in fact pass the law that assigns the Electors. There is no challenge to be had there.
That's pretty good, you should write an ebook.
The difficult part in any software is figuring out what to build and the overall architecture.
If you find that you've fully specified what the software you're building is supposed to do, you might have also just finished implementing it.
If for some reason that is not true, you should stop everything and write a code generator that accepts your specification as input. That is, if you're really sure that you've actually specified everything already.
If you really need it explained to you, here is a link explaining how to learn to code.
http://programming-motherfucke...
Don't forget to read the Manifesto while you're there.