C++ can be clean. The problem is really Macro metaprogramming madness tends to lead to some really strange code and sometimes straight up gibberish. I much prefer Objective C as well, I think its terse, readable and *usually* fairly resistant to a lot of the gunk C++ has accumulated. HOWEVER with that said C++ *can* be well written and clear. Hell even PERL can be. Its just that often it isn't.
More than a head per side? It's been attempted, and turned out it's not really worth it. It's a lot of extra complication for not that much benefit. Heads are expensive and generate heat, so it works out to close 2X the price anyway, plus an increased change of failure. Easier and safer to just add another drive.
These days there are SSDs too.
When was that part of SV culture? Even if you go back to the old-school SV firms, they were pretty negative on telecommuting, and ran regular offices. What era and kind of company do you have in mind? If you go back to the '60s-'90s even, Silicon Valley companies like Intel, Sun, Apple, SGI, Oracle, etc. required regular office time. You could certainly shift your schedule at many of them (e.g. come in at 10am, not 8am, as long as you stay late too), but you couldn't work from home, or get away with less than 40+ hours in the office (often 50+).
From a monetary, stock-price perspective, at the moment the main value in Yahoo is that they own a significant stake in Alibaba, a huge Chinese conglomerate. Their stake in Alibaba at current prices is worth about $34 billion, and Yahoo's current market cap is ~$40 billion. Even assuming a discount on their Alibaba stake due to some overhead that would be involved in unwinding it, it still represents more than half of Yahoo's stock value.
It's depressing that morons are willing to do so much damage for so little gain.
Here is the thing - they're not morons - they're sociopaths. The morons are the rest of us for not making simple legal changes to prevent this nonsense, largely because the beneficiaries of this theft want it to continue.
Well, I don't know what they're planning, but ISTM that if they divide the storage area they can greatly extend the time at which they're generating energy in exchange for nearly halving the peak generation capability...and without much pumping (which adds an additional inefficiency or three).
OTOH, the amount of energy that can be generated by water stored at a particular height depends on the fall distance. So the potential generation capability will vary a lot as the tide changes. Maybe some of the inflow could be used to drive a hydralic ram to lift some of the water higher than max high tide level. But that *does* introduce additional inefficiencies.
All in all, I don't know, but it looks pretty iffy.
You don't need a huge tide, that just makes it more efficient, and cheaper to build, and requiring less land and construction. So perhaps it's only feasible in a few places, but any country with a coast on the Atlantic, the Pacific, or the Indian Oceans should be able to make it work with enough effort and expense. Most of them just wouldnt' find it practical.
Tidal power would seem to have a lot going for it, but there's probably a good reason that it hasn't taken off before now. Of course, that reason may have been solved...
For that matter, cost overruns are also likely on large nuclear plant projects. (Every one I've heard about has had a significant cost overrun, of course there's a huge selection bias...)
Ah...Little Bobby Tables.
> it was shown that Wikipedia is on par with dead tree encyclopedias
The linked article above is from 2005. A LOT has changed in a decade.
What has changed that's relevant? The existence of mobile devices? Bah.
> What makes it more true now than it was then?
Thanks to the wonders of modern technology and the rise of political correctness fanatics
Political correctness is new since 2005? Ummm, let me guess, you're under 30, aren't you?
You have groups openly state on Wikipedia that it's their goal to push their viewpoints on articles.
Which was also true before 2005.
Clickbait sites written by people close to these groups get turned into sources.
Also true before 2005.
I'll stop here, but nothing you mention was any different previously.
It had come a long way, then it started being manipulated by ideology pushing extremists that have become very adept at abusing the hell out of labrynthian policies to the point that even when the author of a news article flat out says "They're lying, I never said that at all" it's the author that gets punished.
This exact same complaint was common before it was shown that Wikipedia is on par with dead tree encyclopedias. What makes it more true now than it was then?
Nah, you can do things with GUI that can't be done at a text prompt. The reverse is also true. I don't think your analogy applies.
I'll bet your text prompt is displayed on a GUI, nearly all of the time. Mine certainly is.
Yes, but it's not progress if it destroys the more technical constructs that allow more knowledgeable people to be more productive. Replacing whole interfaces with a search box does just that.
Does it? I don't think so. The omnibox makes me more productive, not less. The difference is tiny, granted, but it's non-zero.
Sorry, but you severly underestimate the problem. Severely. When she was on warfarin she had to take blood tests several times a week, and they kept changing the dose because her diet wasn't rigidly unchanging.
You are assuming the company would know the legal limits of an NSL. you are assuming the company would care about legal limits. If the NSA agent makes a good case of "Terrorism" then they will likely get what they want.
Of course the company would know the legal limits. They have attorneys.
That they might not care I addressed in the second paragraph.
Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker
