I looked at my pictures. It labeled my cat as a dog. I'm outraged.

I wouldn't go as far as to say they are saying that black people aren't smart enough to understand the situation, but I will readily agree that people are trying to work this up into something that it really isn't.

News flash, given their skin color, it is easier for black folks to be mistaken for apes in an image processing algorithm than white people. This just shows the algorithm isn't perfect. Write up a bug and make a test case.

Now that I think of it, I wonder how non-technical folks think that image recognition works. Maybe if you were ignorant on the subject, you might immediately think "OMG, they have racist programmers at Google." Of course, this is where responsible media outlets would point out that computers have zero prejudice and that image recognition is hard work.

We can go back to civil-war era marching in straight lines and box formations. That's apparently incredibly brave.

Just another reason to be against liberty.

And thus have no chance of beating Hillary. Gender based voting is going to become a major issue this election.

That first sentence proves that you have NOT read Laudato Sii, and are still speaking out of ignorance- because just about everything you just said is in there.

What happens to your 'standard' linked lists solution when you have ten values scattered over an array which is 1000! (factorial 1000) in each dimension? For most genuinely sparse arrays, a hashmap is a better approximation of an efficient implementation. Of course, there will be corner cases where you want to do something different, but linked lists strike me as an extremely poor solution except in arrays where more than about 10% of cells have data.

I should have read the linked questions before replying...

Stupid, stupid, STUPID! Why have numRows and numCols in a sparse array? Things with unnecessary, arbitrary bounds annoy me. My implementation of Conway's Game of Life runs on a sparse array precisely because that allows the world to stretch arbitrarily in any direction a glider goes, limited only by the capacity of the bignum library and the total store available to the program.

And this is how we teach computer science?

Sigh.

Sparse array entries, in general, are not necessarily immutable, although they may be so in this case. Most spreadsheets are implemented as sparse arrays, for example. But your point about the benefit of a map is well made.

Took me about 4 hours:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

I think if you read the whole thing, you'll find he's a pretty equal opportunity offender, sexual libertarians got a good hundred paragraphs against their lifestyle as well.

Except in this case it's the BBC. Is it that hard to get a judgement in the UK?

In fact, why not get a judgement to get the original data removed from the original web page? It would vanish from Google.

Or why not get Google to downrate web pages deemed illegal by a judgement?

So I sold my slave to my buddy in the 6th year.

And he sold me his slave.

You say "loophole" while I say "cheap labour".

My argument would be inheritance. A family could bypass all the legalities of inheritance simply by "marrying" each other.

Which was a problem whether you allowed Mom to marry her sons or whether you allow Dad to marry his sons.

And then divorce them and splitting the assets 50/50.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

When i refer to states rights, I mean the PEOPLE of the state deciding what is a deemed "a right".

Nope. Still wrong. If something is a "right" then how can a state government (or a city government) declare that it is NOT a right?

Even if the majority in that state/city says so?

Your Rights are not subject to majority approval.

As I have been trying to say though, in my first post, marriage was never a right (until SCOTUS declared it to be) it was always a PRIVILEGE granted to by the states (the status constituents who are represented by their local representatives).

Again, marriage existed BEFORE any of the states here existed. There is no "PRIVILEGE granted".

If the government cannot grant a citizen a right then how come they JUST DID??????

The Supreme Court dis NOT just grant "a right" to anyone.

They just made it ILLEGAL to DENY that right.