I'm going to wait until someone who isn't essentially gambling with their patients' lives without informed consent can review these findings.

Why? Do unethical experiments (by western standards) somehow not work? If we listened to ALL the handwringers we couldn't even experiment on mice, or do nuclear tests on our own planet, and then were would we be?

TFA doesn't say what caused the dam break, sometimes it's actually nobody's fault, ie: "shit happens".

Given that the previous engineering firm bailed out a few years ago with a letter that stank of CYA, I'm going to guess it's not that this time.

You want to help restore privacy? Start by burning down the Google offices and NSA headquarters.

That won't do anything. Step 1 would be getting CALEA and any similar laws requiring networks to be built in an insecure manner repealed. Once that's done, rebuild telephone and email networks to support easy to use end-to-end encryption. And make sure any storage devices encrypt all data at rest. Any services which require you to store data on a third-party server, or transmit through a third party server, unencrypted (or encrypted with a key outside your control) must be considered less private; that's not the fault of the third parties, that's just a fact.

The idea would be to make bulk collection infeasible, and individual privacy violation difficult enough that the violator does actually have to work at it, and has a good chance of being caught at it.

...more of it is worse. And even if total days of school are the same, penny-ante 2-week-long breaks spread throughout the year are not as good as a long break to let the body and mind rest from the trauma of public school.

You can start by not signing another contract that forbids you from discussing your pay with fellow employees. Just that one step down the path towards improving workers rights may be enough for you to see the strength that comes from many united to a common cause.

In the US, it doesn't matter whether I sign such a contract or not. It's not valid.

Guess what? There is a minimum wage requirement on H1Bs.

Given a lack of standardized job titles, it's easy enough to fudge. Anyway, H1Bs are so dominant in some areas that their salaries set the prevailing wage.

There is a $6,000+ processing fee for H1Bs that act as tarrifs.

Not high enough to be significant.

A local worker can take an H1Bs job away at anytime by meeting the absolute minimum requirement of the job description and the job description must be posted in public at the company.

The first part isn't even true, and in any case the job description typically includes things which work out to "experience in this particular position.

The main problem is that H1B is 90% Indian and Chinese and there is a certain "hate" for such people. Do people ever mean H1B employees from England, Australia, Netherlands etc? Nope. By H1B, they mean Indian and Chinese high tech workers.

You can put the race card down now. About 64% are Indian, 8% Chinese. Do you ever see rooms full of nothing but English H-1B workers, with maybe one token American in sight? How about French? Australian? Japanese? You DO see that with Indian H-1Bs. Why is that, do you think?

The Earth-Moon barycenter is very nearly outside of Earth itself (it's about 0.75 Earth radii from Earth's center), so let's not get too high on our horses...

That's no moon! (Ask David Weber)

It can even be applied to dating. On the first date I offer a marshmallow or if they have the willpower to not eat the marshmallow the promise of sex. So far it's managed to flawlessly protect me from a number of impulsive women.

You're doing it wrong. If you do it right, the response from impulsive women will be to "prove" that they can eat the marshmallow AND have sex with you.

Also the marshmallow test is pretty flawed when used with anyone who has experience. Doesn't matter how much impulse control you have, if promises of delayed gratification have in the past been consistently broken and led to no gratification.

The advanced bit-twiddle trick for counting one bits in an unsigned int is to realize it's such a useful operation that the hardware (on newer x86 CPUs, anyway) has an instruction for it, so you ought to use it.

I used to think I was a computer scientist, but now I'm not sure. Euclid? Diophantus? Babbage? Lovelace (albeit she'd be a founding mother)? Church? Goedel?

Not Babbage or Lovelace I wouldn't think... too practical :-)
Church and Turing, perhaps; the functional programmers can follow the former and the procedural ones the latter. I'd probably also include Claude Shannon.

The overhead of malloc and free is massive compared to the equivalent operations in a managed runtime. Allocation is typically very cheap (since you don't need to manage the heap as a balancing data structure) and deallocation is effectively free, unless you need to be finalized, and there is no need to rebalance the heap.

Deallocation is NOT free. It's just borrowed. You're paying the costs in the garbage collector rather than inline.

but gawddamn, if I meet ONE more unshaven skinny ratty-haired white dev/programmer in his late twenties/early thirties with an aversion to water, soap, matching colors and food (what is it with devs and eating disorders???) here in Seattle,

Wow, things have changed since I was that age. Back then, the stereotype was that we were fat.

but gawddamn, if I meet ONE more unshaven skinny ratty-haired white dev/programmer in his late twenties/early thirties with an aversion to water, soap, matching colors and food (what is it with devs and eating disorders???) here in Seattle,

Wow, things have changed since I was that age. Back then, the stereotype was that we were fat.