I read that the on average, having one child is the equivalent of driving 10 hummers to work every day. Don't blame the people who have 2mpg vehicles, blame the people who have children.

It's also how it destroys OSS projects. For every 1 useful fork, there are 99 useless ones. A city with 100k people may find it nice to have an option of several hospitals, but they don't need 100 hospitals, even if they're all using volunteer workers. Instead of a few good ones you get a bunch of mostly crappy ones. And the ones with good promise can't get enough volunteers because they don't realize how find the good hospitals.

All kinds of patents, including DNS, DHCP, DNSSEC, ISCSI, RADIUS, SMTP, POP3, DSA. MS owns the patents on many RFCs, but are under their generic "Community Promise".

Don't worry, Microsoft owns the patents on several IPv6 RFCs, but they promise not to sue anyone. It's the exact same promise that they gave for .Net. Really, the exact one. They have a spot on their website with this promise and the list of all the patents they promise not to sue against, which includes both C#, .Net, and IPv6, among many other things.

Let me guess, now you refuse to use Linux because Linux implements several of these MS patents in order for IPv6 to work.

At my state Uni, CS 101 and 102 were specifically designed to fail as many students as possible. Between the two, about 80% of the students will fail or drop out. CS101 shouldn't be easy, it should push the limits. They started to do this because students would get too far into CS before dropping out, which costs them money and wastes everyone's time. I should also mention there was no CS minor, one of the few majors that had no minor.

More like going from JavaScript to C. We need the performance. For certain parts of the rendering, Mantle tech demos were showing upwards of a 10x increase in performance. Some of the stuff I was reading was saying that while OpenGL and Direct3D made getting a minimum viable product out the door, Mantle was dramatically faster for getting a game that got more than 10fps. Once you hit the stage of game development where you need to optimize the code to make the game playable, Mantle was much faster for coding.

One example that they had is AMD took some expert game engine developers, the best in the industry, who had spent years optimizing their engine to make it faster, and with in 3 months of learning Mantle, they were able to have crappy unoptimized Mantle code out performing the DX11 code. Further time spent make Mantle much much faster with little effort.

The other big thing is graphic artists are easily able to try new techniques without putting months of optimizations behind them. They can quickly flesh out some code and get 20-30fps to see if it's even workable. It becomes the difference between trying new things and not.

When your API is system call limited, then you reduce system calls by 20%-30% and you see a 20%-30% increase in performance, you might accidentally make a link.

He wouldn't be good there either. If he can't understand limited resources, he won't be able to help other programmers understand it. If you can't apply knowledge, you're only as good as a search engine. Access to knowledge is trivial in this age.

Did they pull the update? I updated at work just fine, but at home, it now claims I have the newest version with 36.0.4

$20k-$30k just means you getting ripped off. State Unis for out-of-state students with no subsidies are closer to $7k/sem around here, on par with the national average for per high-school student cost for public schools. In-state is closer to $3k, which is nearly 2x more than what I paid a decade ago. Seems several University owned patents have expired and there's less "free" funding. We were raking in some serious money from some STEM cell and computer tech patents, making it really cheap to go to college.

In my experience, people who can't communicate also cannot code. I'm not limiting communication to write a paper or just words, but in combination, so verbal, written, and drawings. I don't care if code works, I care it works for the correct reasons. It's not hard to find someone who can do "complex" stuff and make an end result, but I prefer people who can do "simple" stuff and get the same result.

Sounds like the same reason G+ asks for copyright permissions. My guess is MS doesn't freely hand out the patents because they don't want Java whole-sale ripping out chunks of code and dropping it in their product. I assume if you continue to use everything as .Net, you should be fine, but don't try taking MS code and using it for non-.Net related projects.

Then they're completely wrong, to the point that they do not work at all for anything. The fact that my computer seems to work must be dumb luck and was not purposefully designed using scientific theory.

There is gravity in the middle of empty space with no detectable baryonic matter for hundreds of millions of light-years in all directions. You explain that without an unseen new matter. That's right. There are massive voids in space, where we can see the galaxies in the background behind them perfectly clear, but we can detect gravitational lensing within the void. Even if the lensing was caused by dust, the sheer amount of lensing would mean an amount of dust that would be easily detectable. You could also say it's a bunch of blackholes that got ejected from their host galaxy and just so happened to not drag any dust along with them. Even if you could accept that, the lensing is so spread out, it couldn't be point sources.

And there is no evidence that smoking is bad for you. Our models are wrong.

Man1: Man, I'm only getting 25mpg, and I normally get 35mpg
Man2: Ever think that our understanding of the chemistry is wrong, and the gasoline is losing energy in a way you never expected?
Man1: I'm going to go with the gas station added an ethanol mix which reduced the energy density
Man2: But what if our current understanding of chemistry wildly wrong, and you're car is special and shows our flawed understanding?

Man2 could be correct. Hell, anyone could be correct about anything, there is no real 100% or 0% confidence.

Then the point was not well made, because it looks to fit perfectly.