Some people prefer the high-quality version and are willing to pay extra, others are unwilling to pay extra, or have poor vision and think the low-quality version is good enough.
Others think that the quality of a movie cannot be measured in pixels.
I remember one of my Computer Architecture lecturers lamenting the end of of punchcard era.
Gone are the days of being able to see how hard a PhD student is working by counting the boxes of punchcards in their office.
Gone are the days when sending code to be compiled meant everyone could go to the pub.
I don't want colleagues or (future) employers to know
Then why put it right there in your username?
Restricting yourself from options doesn't necessarily make you a better programmer.
The point is not that we should restrict our choice of technology as programmers; in fact, the more technologies we play with the better programmers we will become. However, the point is that sometimes a specific choice of technology in a project *must* restrict the other technologies we can use in that project.
For example, if our project requires that we always call some cleanup procedure after using some resource, we may choose to ban GOTO, exceptions and call/cc *in that project* since they break the logical flow of procedure calls. TFA is saying that massively-parallel functional code can be completely ruined if we allow even the *possibility* of side-effects, so we may choose to ban side-effects *in that project*.
to have monads is to compromise functional programming.
How so? If anything, monads are one of the great success stories of (pure) functional programming.
There are lots of interesting monads which are literally useless in the presence of effects. For example, side-effects can:
Leak private references from the Single Thread monad, making its encapsulation useless.
Perform irreversible changes, making monads like Software Transactional Memory and Backtrack/Undo useless.
Enter infinite loops, making the Partial monad useless.
Break referential transparency, making Memoisation useless.
1. You pay Comcast for Internet access at X speed.
2. Netflix pays Amazon and others for Internet access at Y speed ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N... )
3. You pay Netflix to send you movies via those lines that you both pay for.
4. Comcast holds your content hostage, wanting an extortion payment from NetFlix.
The point about NetFlix paying for bandwidth is important, since Comcast keep claiming things like "they shouldn't get a free ride" and "somebody needs to pay for the infrastructure", but they *were* paying for infrastructure; just not Comcast's (directly, anyway).
This is why open source is so important.
How so? TrueCrypt is neither Open Source or Free Software. It's freeware (ie. proprietary).
Zuckerschmuck saying "teach them to code and everything will be great", then he really is clueless and out of touch. But, we knew that anyway.
More likely is that Zuckerberg, being at the top of an established pyramid, would love to see a huge influx of programmers into the job market.
Wages would come down, saving money for all established players. Average quality would also come down, making it more difficult for startups to disrupt the status quo.
It's the same as all this visa and lack-of-STEM nonsense.
Note that the words "could have" are used, which makes your point moot. They are not claiming that the Universe formed spontaneously from nothing, they are claiming that such claims cannot be refuted (yet). Or, alternatively, they're claiming that theories involving from-nothing Universes do not refute existing results; unlike, say, a theory which allows faster-than-light travel, which *would* refute existing results, and therefore have a much larger burden of proof (ie. it would have to be able to replace relativity).
What kinds of useful objects do you envisage being printed which aren't available from a local store? I've been following 3D printing for a while and have helped build a few machines, but the only objects I've seen printed are either purely aesthetic (eg. keyrings) or could be bought from a local shop in less time than the print takes.
Producing them cheaply enough to rival chips made of processed sand is another matter entirely. Anyone remember gallium arsenide chips that were going to eat silicon for lunch back in the 80s? Yeah , well.... still niche.
To a first approximation, I'd say the cost of "applying sticky-tape to coal" isn't very different to "processing sand".
Gallium Arsenide, on the other hand, sounds complicated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
GitLab is a thing, if you want your own GitHub stop building it from scratch and just use the real thing.
Gitorious is a thing, if you want your own Gitorious stop building it from scratch and just use the real thing.
Oblig. https://xkcd.com/1244/
The non-permanence of cloud services like storage and sharing is going to be hard to solve. Sure some will last. But some will not. How do you choose the ones the will?
By building a "Services as a Service" layer on top, which delegates the storage to whoever's still around.
Oblig. https://xkcd.com/927/
Bruce Willis agrees.
One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis
