Acknowledged that in some smaller shows you used to be able to sit right under the fireworks and having the smoldering hunks of cardboard rain down on you. This was kind of cool, but in my experience, hasn't been an option for a long time.
They can do whatever they want, it's their site.
Did you think about that before you wrote it? If not, take a second and think about it.
There are many, many, many things they cannot do with their site.
Within technical limitations, they can do anything they want with their site. However, some things they could do may have legal or financial consequences.
The range of penalties would of course need to be scaled to the size of the drone -- a toy quad-copter is not the same as a Predator, but the point is the legal infrastructure needs to ensure responsibility for those piloting drones. Note that I emphasized the pilot. The pilot needs to be on the hook, not the company employing the pilot, the manufacturer of the drone, or anyone else.
In the event of an outage he literally takes a mule down the face of a cliff to get to it. Places like that really do still exist in the United States, as hard as it is to believe.
Good example of a high bandwidth, high latency data transfer.
Powershell is worthless. HyperV is great.
PS is worthless because, in order to do anything useful, you need to fire up visual studio. Give me a gnu userland any day.
Um... PowerShell has nothing to do with Visual Studio. In fact (among other things), PowerShell lets you easily script against the native
Is this a patentable business model?
Prior art: New Coke.
It is not clear why you would be trying to calculate a value that is a known constant
Because doing so was the task suggested by the parent thread as a possible interview question. A response to that suggested using a programming library to instantiate a circle object and simply extract the circumference and diameter properties from the object, apply a little math and voila. My comment was that doing so didn't count as calculating PI, rather it was just indirectly extracting the constant from some other programming library.
If I were doing the interviewing I wouldn't expect someone to know how to calculate PI, but I would expect someone to know the difference between extracting a constant from a library (directly or indirectly) and knowing the mathematical or other process for deriving the constant. I would be concerned if a candidate didn't know the definition of PI.
I agree with your comments on memorization of APIs and code being a poor indicator of a solid programmer.
Instantiate a circle and get the diameter and radius then divide it out. I dont know if it would simple stop at runtime though...or how to control when it stops showing digits...anyone?
Of course then you are not actually calculating PI, you are extracting (via geometry / math) the value of PI embedded in the circle class that you probably didn't write.
Off the top of my head I have no idea how to actually calculate PI from scratch. If I get to leverage the underlying geometric or trigonometric libraries in the environment, sure; but from scratch, no. I could, of course, look it up, but the context of the interview question above didn't imply that reference material was an option.
If I were interviewing someone and asked the "calculate PI question" and they gave me the response that I gave above, I would consider it a "passing" answer. When I interview people (for programming or otherwise), I am more interested in their ability to understand and clarify the question and how they approach answering the question instead of the actual technical answer. You can look up technical references, you can't look up how to think and communicate.