I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed just how unlike the real Caliphate this is.
Incidentally, QNX has an interesting design in this respect, in that it maps the the source buffer (a page at a time, IIRC) into the address space of the receiving process, and does the copy directly. Or it might map the destination buffer into the address space of the sending process; not sure about that. This allows messages to be arbitrary-length.
Monoliths, e.g. Linux, don't have IPC latency [...]
In the case of non-memory-mapped I/O (e.g. anything that goes through a file descriptor), the major cost isn't context switching, it's copying data. Microkernels have to transfer all this data between address spaces. Macrokernels, on the other hand, have to transfer it between user space and kernel space. It's basically the same operation with basically the same cost, but it falls under a different heading.
With $2 billion, he could afford a MSO.
No, the title did not register as a thing. Nonetheless, I stand by my assessment of Irrlicht as being... well, it doesn't suck at what it does necessarily, but it lacks almost everything you'd want these days.
Mojang are essentially toothless hillbilles.
Oh, it's worse than that. They're nerds.
But you have to admit, it's one hell of a trick.
I think the breakdown is:
- Minecraft IP: $1.9 billion
- Notch's good luck: $90 million
- Rest of company: $10 million
- Chance to port WinRT to the DCPU-16: priceless
First off, Minecraft is written in Java.
Secondly, while Irrlicht has improved recently, it's still a toy. Forward rendering only (hope you like fixed-function pipeline lights), nothing in the way of screen-space effects (motion blur, distortion, ambient occlusion, etc), or multi-pass rendering of any kind for that matter, no current-gen support (OpenGL 4 / D3D11), and even if you can overcome all that, it's still a rendering engine and not a game engine. No networking, no physics, no movie player (not even Vorbis)... need I go on?
Even Torque is better than Irrlicht, despite the crappy scripting system.
Good science is rigorous, objective, and unbiased. Much of the research that comes out of the "social sciences" is a fucking joke compared to a field like, say, physics.
OK, you didn't understand what I said. That's okay, so let's go through this again.
The social sciences are fields like anthropology, sociology, psychology, and behavioural economics. These fields are just as experimentally-based, data-driven, rigorous, and objective as biology.
The humanities are fields like art, history, music, literature, and culture. These are often informed by science, but they are not science. They are still important to study.
Anita Sarkeesian is doing humanities, not social science. If you pay attention to her videos, she does report results from social science, because this is part of the methodology. But she is not doing science, and she would be the first to agree with this.
Did that help?
There are no buts man. up until you did the old victim blaming thing I had respect for your opinion.
It's unfortunate that people are engaging in victim-blaming, because it obscures some potentially very important discussions that we need to have about why nude selfies now seem to be expected behaviour for anyone under the age of 30 in an intimate relationship (Cindy Gallop would probably blame porn, and do follow that link and see what she has to say before you respond to that remark; it's less than 5 min), and why people trust Apple/Facebook/the government with our most personal of personal information.
Right after a hundred or so people have been the victim of a crime is probably not the best time to have this discussion. On the other hand, if we wait too long, the news cycle will have moved on.
I don't see where you got "the evil that is man". Just "the evil that is LEGO marketers".
It's a word way of saying .
Both are garbage, and neither are science.
That the humanities are not science is obvious. To say that the social sciences are not science is crazy, and to say that they both are "garbage" is the bad kind of weird. Admittedly, it does help explain why you think Thunderf00t is rational.
Science limits itself to dealing with only things that are falsifiable and testable. This is precisely why science is so successful and reliable, because it limits itself to things that it can succeed at. However, some things that are important for humans to understand do not currently satisfy one or both of these criteria. For that, other methodologies are required.
Art is important. History is important. Music is important. Literature is important. Morality is important. Languages are important. The law is important. These things cannot be analysed with the same tools that you would use to analyse an atom, or a cell, or a galaxy, but they must be analysed nonetheless.
OK, found it. The mention of razor stubble is there. The "[decrying] the evils of razor stubble and testosterone as more evidence of the evil that is man" is completely absent.