What kind of rational human being does this? Did you try to set fire to your schools property because of a bad grade? I'll look past the B&E and unauthorized access.
He is dangerous, to himself and others. If not juvie, then a psych eval and treatment.
He's a kid, not a rational human being. He needs emotional help, like lots of kids (and sadly, lots of adults). Do you honestly think he'll get that help by being thrown in "juvie", excluded and shunned from normal society?
He did the crime (actually several), he must do the time.
If he wants to play big boy games then he must accept big boy penalties. Fuck your PC "Oh but he's a kid with his whole life ahead of him!" bullshit, he's chosen his path, let him reap the consequences.
This medieval attitude is one reason why the US has the biggest prison population in the world and one of, if not the worst rates of recidivism.
What this kid needs is some help, not "big boy penalties", a.k.a. incarceration and a lifelong criminal record which marks him as "different" from normal people in a way that affects him negatively for the rest of his life. Stop doing that.
Disclaimer: Degree qualified computer scientist working as C/C++ software engineer for the last 25yrs.
That's not a disclaimer -- it's the appeal to authority fallacy. Try actually addressing his points, rather than dismissing them by asserting personal expertise.
One thing we've noticed is the other side: it's often cheaper to just buy the movie, watch it at home (home-popped popcorn) and throw away the disc afterwards than it is to watch it in the theatre.
Home movies have gotten so much cheaper than theatres that this is feasible for most movies. We still see the odd one in the theatre, but that has gotten quite rare over the years.
You actually have something there. HDTV's are relatively cheap compared to the original vacuum tube variety that was used for standard definition. Even if you want to buy a 4K HDTV over the now standard 2K (1080p) 15:9 aspect ratio HDTV's you may pay about 10% more. In fact it is possible to set-up a reasonable home theatre (includes HDTV, DVD/BD player, amplifier and speakers) system for under $2000. Of course you could spend ridicules amounts of money on a home theatre system as well.
If you are into watching movies it is actually cheaper to either rent or if you think you may want to watch the movie again then purchase the Blu-ray. Even if that movie is the latest release and costs say $30 it would still be cheaper to purchase and watch with friends and family than go to a movie theatre.
It probably would be cheaper over the long-haul, plus you don't have people standing up in front of you in the middle of the "closure" scene just to beat the queue to get out... argh, so inconsiderate! Also, you can pause it at any point to talk, make tea or go for a piss. And you don't have to spend time and money travelling to/from the theatre and parking. I'm poor so I neither go to the cinema nor have a big home cinema system, but that'll definitely be my preferred choice upon leaving poverty
cool. then boycott copyrighted works and advocate for changing the law. don't steal. is that what you want to teach your kids?
The point of contention here is that these "copyrighted works" are very old and could be considered culturally significant, and that the current rights holders are not the people who created the works.
Consider this: imagine these laws were even more extreme and it was illegal to share or view an image of the Mona Lisa or a copy of Shakespeare's works online without paying Fox or MGM a stupid sum of money. In that case, would you advocate that society boycott reading Shakespeare or viewing the Mona Lisa? Is that what you want to teach your kids -- to lie back and accept an unjust situation? If so, why? If not, why is it a different situation to "Attack of the 50-foot Woman"?
Well, one way, you can monitor heap usage and trend the usage immediately following full GCs.
The other way to look at it is as a function of time.
None of that applies to modern server-centric garbage collection (GC1). "Stop the world while I collect garbage" makes a server worthless if you have 64 GB and GB takes minutes, which is why the default GC for the server SDK hasn't worked that way since mid Java 7.
That's not quite true; even without a "stop the world" collector, you can still look at the amount of time the parallel GC thread is busy. In fact there seems to be quite a bit of information available with tools such as jstat. Perhaps this could help you better understand actual heap use (this is also a problem I face at work -- processes that run out of heap after many hours, expectedly... argh).
Some info about jstat: http://www.cubrid.org/blog/dev...
Info about G1 (although you already seem very familiar with it): http://www.infoq.com/articles/...
You think Doom and Quake aren't cartoony?
Compared to Commander Keen? Yes.
Surely, when the UK has a population of around 65 million, and China has a population of around 1400 million it makes a difference. We are talking about influencing government policy. So, we spend a huge effort changing UK policy, and at most we can effect a reduction in an output of:
7.7t * 65m = 500.5 million t
7t * 1400m = 9800 million t.
The entire UK output is 5% of China's. If the UK can reduce its output by 20% (hugely unlikely, as just holding steady seems impossible to do), while the Chinese increase theirs by just 1% then the two effects cancel out (to some rounding error that I can't be arsed to calculate).
Focusing on those countries who are both raising their output the most and also have the largest populations (hello too India) seems perfectly sensible.
So if it's "hugely unlikely" to reduce the UK's output, when their per capita emissions are higher than China's, how can we expect China to do it?
Surely it's both fairer and more realistic to treat the targets on a per capita basis and not penalise China for having a large population.
Another time the person on the other end kept repeating only the word yes during my sales pitch and then 5 minutes in switched to "can you please speak chinese". Even when I said "goodbye".
I love it. Thank you! That's going to be my new tactic from this day hence!
"Portable assembly language" is an oxymoron. And I have never heard anyone use that phrase to describe C.
A quick web search will solve that for you. The phrase has been bandied about for quite a few years now, although many people disagree on the topic.
Never mind building abstractions. The C language itself is a significant abstraction from the machine level. Only a small handful of operators and constructs in C have a close analogue to assembler statements (e.g., accumulation, shift and bitwise logical operators.) Therefore I maintain that it is not a low-level language.
While I certainly agree that C is a significant (and useful) abstraction from the machine -- or more specifically, the assembler -- level, I think you've glossed over quite a few things that are much closer in C to how it works at the machine code level, compared to most other languages. Some that spring to mind are:
These are just a handful of many things you need to live with in assembly AND in C, unless you use some non-universal, non-standard library for e.g. strings or GC (Hans Boehm's drop in one seems pretty good though). Additionally, C forces you to declare the types of each variable and function, yet cannot properly enforce type-safety and has no type inference which would have made the job easier.
C is undeniably less low-level than assembly, I consider C to be a low-level language in an arbitrary line-in-the-sand sense. Of course, my view on this is no more valid than yours since how we define "low-level" as some absolute marker is pretty subjective!
Actually you're completely wrong on that, the data suggests that no one can demonstrate long term photographic memory, which is true. If I read a book today, I can probably recall the content for about a week or so, after that it will start to slip and certainly by a mouth or two out I'll retain very little of the information I read over. However that also doesn't matter, usually is something is important enough to remember longer then a week out, you'll have to read it more then once.
Actually you are completely wrong about that. The data suggests that no one can demonstrate even SHORT term photographic memory.
You stated that you can "look over a page" and "load" all the information into your memory before comprehending it. This is an utterly ludicrous claim. You also stated that you can read at over 1000 WPM with very high comprehension. Also a laughable claim that is not supported by any scientific studies.
It's time to boot, do your boot ROMs know where your disk controllers are?