It would be nice to have regex support, but I wouldn't want them to halt their entire development pipeline to implement it. If they had to finish implementing the previous standard before starting on the next one, we would still be on C++03 on account of exported templates.

Tell that to my compiler. I'd say if anything software is very structured; you have a limited pool of recognized syntax that can be combined in specific ways. If you're using a library, you have to adhere to its API. Ultimately your code will be running on some processor, which has a limited set of instructions it can perform. Software has no laws? Hardly.

Sounds like it might already be too late for you...

It should also be noted that as of C++11 threading is part of the C++ standard library (so you usually won't have to use pthreads or any other platform-specific threads directly).

Last I checked (a few years ago) CUDA had better tools and more features than OpenCL. Has this changed much since then? OpenCL didn't even support templates back then...

For completeness, it should also be noted that both C and C++ work with MPI and CUDA. Fortran can theoretically be faster than C or C++ as its compiler can optimize more aggressively (due to the lack of pointer aliasing in Fortran), but I don't have any hard data for how much of a difference it would make in actual runtime speeds.

... but still better than say, Henry Kissinger?

This is used already in multi-frame superresolution. TFS seems to be talking about compressive sensing, which is a completely different beast. Compressive sensing is based on assuming sparseness to solve an underdetermined system of linear equations. It doesn't always work (as it's not always a valid assumption), but when it does you can get very impressive results. That is to say, if you have some underdetermined system of equations, it'll have infinite possible solutions. This obviously doesn't lend itself well to getting a good answer from it, but by imposing the condition of sparseness, you can arrive at a (very close to correct) solution.

What does that have to do with a solar plant? Are you implying that Spain is on the verge of bankruptcy on account of this solar plant? Your comment is tangential at best and nonsensical at worst.

I somehow find that doubtful

Actually that quote is taken out of context. FTFA: "In 2009, NIF officials announced an aim to demonstrate nuclear fusion producing net energy by 30 September 2012. But unexpected technical problems ensured the deadline came and went; the fusion output was less than had originally been predicted by mathematical models. Soon after, the $3.5bn facility shifted focus, cutting the amount of time spent on fusion versus nuclear weapons research - which was part of the lab's original mission." It's stating that their original goal was to break even using fusion in 2012, didn't reach that goal, and shifted focus to weapons. That was a year ago, in 2012, before their recent breakthrough. I doubt they'll be shifting their focus away from fusion again anytime soon

CT Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) has been done on airplanes for many years. Is this special or different in any way? Is the primary innovation just that it's being applied to cars now? The description in the summary makes it sound pretty mundane; "... hoisted onto a turntable, and as it turns, two X-ray detectors on either side scan it. Then multiple images are merged into a single, three-dimensional CT scan". This is pretty much the protocol for any industrial CT imaging.

That would be the case in the absence of gerrymandering. As it stands, the only threat they have is from within their own party during the nomination phase.

TFS states he's an investor, not an executive. Where did you get that idea? The quote "...performed very well under such an extreme test. The batteries went through a controlled burn which the Internet images really exaggerates." is from the driver, not the VP. Just the fact that a VP of the company contacted him about it would indicate that Tesla took the whole event rather seriously.

There is one article stating that they made more on the digital downloads of In Rainbows than all of their previous albums' digital downloads combined. Note that this isn't total sales or other merchandise, just digital downloads. Of course, they didn't have their catalog on itunes until 2008, and when they got started in the early 90's, there wasn't much of a digital market, so the comparison isn't a particularly good one. They have also stated that they won't be doing the pay-what-you-want again in the foreseeable future.

Uhhh then you recalled incorrectly. They made more on OK Computer alone than from In Rainbows.