The Python code

s = ''
for i in range(0,1000000):
    s += str(i)

will be painfully slow too, for multiple reasons. Both Java and Python have ways to do this that aren't dumb.

One of them looks like a chemical engineering PhD student and the other is a tech, so maybe not. The third is an electrical engineering professor who's supposed to be doing software performance research though. He should definitely know better.

Although, when I was at the U of C the people doing software stuff in the EE department had some very interesting ways of doing things.

They're not doing something weird, the article is crazy.

Basically, they wrote some shitty code to do highly inefficient string concatenation and, wow, it turns out that it's less efficient than the caching code in the operating system. They're not comparing in-memory versus disk operations at all.

Uranium nukes are even worse. They require strip mines to get the uranium, and then a bunch of very special purpose equipment to enrich it. If you think it's hard to hide a nuclear reactor from a spy satellite, try hiding a strip mine!

"The Sum of All Fears" was released in 1991. Clancy's comment about using computer weapon design is even more applicable today. CnC machines are also now something geeks build in their basements out of a few hundred dollars worth of parts.

Generally it's not an accepted defence to say "you should have seen what I would have done if I hadn't nuked them!"

So is American culture. It doesn't mean all Americans are killers.

So you burn over 800 calories an hour running? Why is it you think I don't? I bet we're using the same calculators and you weigh a bit less than I do.

I think I struck a Slashdot nerve. You're the third person so far to reply with a weirdly aggressive and poorly researched message.

I agree. Now turn it around. Think of all the things on the Internet you WOULD miss if they were gone. Now think of how many of them you would be willing to pay for. Think of the number of times you've seen the term "paywall" used on Slashdot.

I don't weigh 150 lbs, and I didn't say per day.

I'm not sure I really follow your argument, but the open source community seems like a reasonable example. Linux is paid for - big companies sink billions of actual dollars into it, and contributors put in even more value in time. Quality, in the things that are important to the people contributing to it, is high. Quality in the things that are not important to contributors, but are important to many of the people who do not contribute? Not so high.

Quality is also high in ad encrusted click bait sites - in the eyes of the people contributing to them. But that's not you.

naturally a muscular heavy build

Or, you know, if you lift, bro.

Everybody gets stereotyped in film. Stereotypes let the audience feel familiar with characters they don't have time to get to know. Sometimes a movie will take one or two characters and write them out of their stereotype in order to tell a story, surprise the audience, or win an Oscar.

Longer running formats, like TV series, like to start with stereotyped characters everyone can become familiar with quickly and then do episodes that focus on their "other side."

That's actually a more interesting fact than you might think. Males are actually more likely at birth, and outnumber females until the age of 30 or so. But in the > 30 demographic females are in the majority, and that majority increases with age. Why? Because males die at a higher rate. Being male has a higher risk of death than being female.

There's always someone who has to misuse the concept of objectification. Most people don't like having sex with objects as much as with people.