The Kobo Aura H2O and H2O2 are both IP67 as well and avoid the Kindle ecosystem. I've very happy with my H2O.

That link has only the source code. It does not include the training data set.

The submission link requires CC-0 attribution, which makes me hopeful that they plan to release the data freely. But I hunted all over the site and couldn't find either a link to the data or any comment about their plans for it going forward.

He's no longer the head, but it's not his "former company"; he remained as chairman until 2014 and has been a technology adviser since then. He actually puts in more time at the company now than he did in the chairman years.

https://www.theverge.com/2014/...

The quote is about Windows phone profits, not Microsoft as a whole. Microsoft did see a downturn in overall profits last year when phone revenue tanked, but this year a boom in cloud products has turned that around nicely.

The article is still wrong, though, because it confuses profits and revenues (Windows phone is not profitable at all, and I don't think it ever was). If you click through far enough the original article doesn't make that mistake:

https://www.neowin.net/news/ye...
During the quarter ending in December, Microsoft's phone revenue dropped to just $200 million, which included some sales of feature phones, before the company completed its sale of that business unit to Foxconn in November. That figure has now dropped to virtually nothing.

According to the company's 10-Q filing to the SEC for Q3 FY2015, its phone hardware revenue for that quarter totalled $1.397 billion. One year later, in its 10-Q for Q3 FY2016, Microsoft said that phone revenue had fallen by $662 million, reducing it to $735 million.

Today, as Microsoft published its earnings report for Q3 FY2017, it revealed that its "Phone revenue declined $730 million". Based on its earlier financial disclosures, that means the company's phone hardware revenue fell to just $5 million for the entire quarter ending March 31, 2017.

Clark only has 3 of the 5 major credit bureaus listed at that link; PRBC is a little wonky, but if you're freezing your credit you'll want to freeze it with Equifax, Experian, Innovis, and TransUnion. http://krebsonsecurity.com/201... has all 4, or use Clark's links and add https://www.innovis.com/person...

If it made Experian go out of business, and the other two invest heavily in security to prevent another event

I assume that's a thinko for Equifax (not experian)

There are 4 other credit bureaus, not 2; Experian, Innovis, PRBC, Transunion. Though PRBC is weird.

The Bering Sea's typically not involved in the Indonesia raft theory. The Kon-Tiki route was all south of the equator. And the Bering Strait was a land route beginning c. 21,000 BP, though access along the coast was blocked by ice until about 17,000 BP and the interior route didn't clear up until about 13,500 BP. There's a pretty good history of the sea level in the area here: http://theconversation.com/fir...

But like I said there's plenty of other evidence against the theory, at least as a significant driver of human migration.

The OP's bizarre, too (I ascribe that to the media losing something in translation, not necessarily the original research); Clovis-first has been out of favor for decades now, and the timing on when the Bering crossing was open doesn't agree with anything I've seen espoused in recent years. The inland route probably de-iced c. 13,500 BP, and the coastal route by 17,000 BP give or take. And most mDNA evidence has suggested that the coastal route was used, so the timing's not only fine for humans in Mexico by 13,000 BP, but even a few millenia earlier.

I'm guessing the research was phrased more as "here's additional evidence against Clovis-first and for an earlier date" and the reporters added some sloppy wording around it to sensationalize things.

Thor Heyerdahl is that you?

This was essentially the theory that drove his Kon-Tiki expedition, exteded past Polynesia into Indonesia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It's a really good theory, but DNA and linguistic evidence suggest there's not much basis for it (though of course they can't do much to rule out isolated instances as opposed to larger trends).

In Canada the earliest peoples are referred to as "First Nations." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]. I like that term. I wish we would use it here (i.e. in the USA) as well.

I'm not a huge fan; "First" is a Eurocentric label that's a little dismissive of pre-Columbian cultures in the Americas. It doesn't reflect the fact that there was a rich history of cultures rising and falling in North America prior to European contact. The natives at the time were really the latest in a series of different cultures in Canada (and the Americas), not the first. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... among many others.

Copy collection and other compacting approaches have some major advantages, especially decreasing memory fragmentation, but they also have major disadvantages including higher latency and loss of cache coherence. And greater overall memory use - the old "double your memory" problem is long since solved, but if you have very large objects there are still issues there. Compacting was super popular in the 1990s but many modern GCs have moved back toward more traditional mark-sweep with incremental /generational enhancements, especially in high performance NUMA environments.

Copy collect (and related mark-compact, etc approaches) is certainly still viable in many circumstances and there have been a lot of advances in minimizing the latency impact, but calling current mark-sweep based approaches outdated or not "real" GC is nonsense.

The Bohem collector "uses a mark-sweep algorithm". I.e. NOT a modern GC

I'm not a C++ fan at all, but in this context this doesn't make sense. The vast majority of Java implementations (including the Oracle JDK) also use mark-sweep GC algorithms too, and many of the most cutting edge GC algorithms are mark-sweep algorithms. Boehm-Weiser uses a pretty sophisticated mark-sweep policy that is both generational and incremental.

http://javarevisited.blogspot.... notes that:
"Concurrent Mark Sweep Garbage collector is most widely used garbage collector in java and it uses an algorithm to first mark object which needs to collect when garbage collection triggers."

http://www.oracle.com/webfolde... explains the current generational mark-sweep algorithm used by the Oracle JDK (standard Java).

Scripting languages are:
1. Interpreted

"Interpreted" is not a language feature, it's an implementation detail. There are C interpreters like EiC (and even assembly interpreters used in things like Bochs) and Python JIT compilers like PyPy.

2. Run directly from source

Even CPython compiles to bytecode, which is a tad more efficient that running directly from source.

Beyond that, Java has proper Garbage Collection rather than reference-counted garbage

Neither the Python nor Java language defines a GC algorithm, ref-counting or otherwise, and different implementations of each use different GC methods. PyPy, for instance (which is the Python JIT implementation that most people who care about performance use) has no ref counting but uses an incremental hybrid mark-sweep GC.

Even the CPython implementation, which does use ref-counting, combines it with a generational GC to detect cycles.

Java has real support for native threads running on different cores instead of whatever kind of wimpy simulation (green threads?) is offered on Python

Python has native support for OS-level threads and has since the bad old days when the 1.1 JVM only had green threads. Python also has superior support for multiprocessing (e.g. the ability to fork() without exec(), which Java historically has lacked) which means you're not stuck throwing out memory protection every time you want to have concurrency.

You're probably conflating OS-level thread support with the global interpreter lock, which is an actual Python pain point for concurrent programming in some circumstances.

Java has a standardized GUI library in Swing instead of what the heck are you supposed to use in Python?

Alternatively one might say that Python has a real cross-platform library in wxpython that actually uses the native widgets rather than attempting to emulate them badly a la Swing.

Python fails because it's bitch to import code from SomeUnknownD00d into yours, hoping SUD was kind enough to convert tabs to spaces. And to logical spaces. If my code has tabstops of 4, and SUD has tabstops of 2, all bets are off.

This is wrong. SomeUnknownD00d can use whatever tab stop and mix of spaces/tabs that he wants and you can import from your code no problem, even if your tab stop is different or you use all spaces or whatever. Spacing only has to be consistent within a single block, there's no inter-module dependency there.

Most thieves work as teams.
Robbery is one of the crimes most likely to have a group of perpetrators, but even so the majority of robberies (55-60%) are committed by solo individuals.

https://books.google.com/books...