and there are quite a few human pairs for which one would not be able to convince the other that they were speaking intelligibly, either.
it is irrelevant. it is only necessary for one computer (however that's defined) to pass this test. i don't see how it's really any better than Turing though. it's a nice idea, it seems even more vague than the Turing test.
i wasn't blaming you, and yes, 'they' drew first blood on this. it's just a shame that it goes this way.
it's another piece of capital that never ends up on the balance sheets and is thus disposable: trained workers who aren't backstabbing betrayers out of necessity. pfft! gone.
My advice: Bilk Dubai for all its worth now, because in 50 years it'll be a distant memory of largesse gone awry by modern standards.
Interesting. Kind of like Mono Lake, just a zillion tines larger.
and never the innocent feeling compelled threatened or coerced into pleading guilty to a lesser charge, b
You know what? If an innocent person pleads guilty before a judge, they are perjuring themselves.
That's what "No Contest" pleas are for.
A culture without loyalty is doomed. Now we will see what happens when loyalty is not only worthless, but actively detrimental.
But free-to-p[l]ay gaming is also becoming a serious contender. It solves the problem of gamers who won't buy a game without a demo, it solves the problem of having an adequate online player base, and it solves the problem of gamers who simply won't buy games but who might buy the occasional piece of DLC.
The truth is that Gamestop guaranteed their eventual nonexistence when they dropped games for old consoles. I get that they can't stock everything, but it eliminated my reasons to go in there. I can get all the same stuff cheaper somewhere else, and I can get a lot of stuff that they can't (or won't) get. Since I don't really need a $200+ headset, I'm not sure what I'd go in there for anyway.+
I thought I read somewhere that it was 10,000,000 kbps, or was it 10gbps?
Er...ya...or something.
Having read his rant I gotta admit that I do not understand what that guy is trying to say
I mean, ever since Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage labor over the first software / software combination, each and every follow-up of similar devices had been utilized by a very limited group of people who --
1. Have the interest to learn how the device works
2. Have the intelligence to understand
3. Have the time to do it
Of course, there is another type of 'computer' - the Abacus invented by the Chinese - but that device, unlike the Babbage machine and whatever followup devices it had inspired, - was kinda self-limiting
Just because some terms can have vague boundaries doesn't mean that anything goes
In theory, that's true. In practice, that's false.
Doesn't matter, fewer people suffering is still better than nothing. The fact you don't care about the actual number of people supposedly suffering speaks volumes about what you really care about - i.e. Hating Apple, not some guy in China just happy to have a good job.
Their kind simply doesn't fucking get begin and end even in pseudo code
Huh? IIRC, pseudo-code most often uses indentation to indicate the level of nesting. I always thought that this was why Python used it in the first place; it's a good idea, even if I don't like it.
And you may as well say that C/Pascal/whatever spoils you into thinking that braces are magical. It's just syntax. If your employees really can't figure out fucking braces then there's either something seriously wrong with your company, or you should stop hiring from the Special Needs school. It's not Python's fault.
(The colleges aren't supposed to be there just to provide training for your company anyway, but that's another story.)
yeah, but beautifully broken. I don't like it much personally, but the restrictions do make it harder to write obtuse python code, which makes it much, much better for collaborative projects or introductory education. its wide use is another good reason to teach intro with it; even if the student doesn't take more classes, they have more opportunities to self-educate. even if you think it's a bad language (and, imho, it's not bad, just unremarkable), it's still a reasonable choice for a first teaching language.
> But your accusations of technical ignorance are really just a demonstration of your own technical ignorance.
You do realize that only kooks are so worried about "teh Guvmintz iz trakin uz!!" that they would give up the cellular concept for your bizarre "beep me, and I'll look for a pay phone" concept.
And frankly dear Coward, I know exactly how pagers work. And there is no way in hell I or anyone that actually had some adroitness in technology would ever design a mass communication system around that. I'm surprised you didn't try to make a call for fax machines instead of cellular comms.
Now turn in your computer for a nice secure abacus.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
