How do we know it won't do both? It could control the gene pool.

For those who don't know, libsodium is a C library that PHP will be utilizing. It is not a PHP library.

I agree this almost seems to be a non-story. I read it as the FCC Chairperson announcing a possible way to curry favor with the FCC. I suppose time will tell if any non-mandating initiatives are introduced to encourage adoption.

That would imply the market is supposed to have optimized in accordance with preferences of one man. Excepting possibly a post-scarcity society (replicators anyone?), the market cannot optimize everyone's preference. There are lots of things I would like the market to manifest but that I don't see them doesn't mean the market has failed.

Umm... citation needed? I live in Iowa.

Tell that to people from Wisconsin, it is recognized by both sides that theirs is better. We are better than we were thanks to a tax hike in 2015. I would not be one to call what we have bad, but it is not "great."

Barely used? I suppose you could find ways to measure it to make that case, but no one here is thinking that way. If you look at the number of cars per unit time compared to some congested California corridor sure it would seem barely used but that is not really a fair comparison if you consider, say, population density. It might be worth mentioning that a lot of the lesser roads are limestone / gravel.

I am reading this over an expensive (>$90/mo for 50 GB of daytime usage) satellite Internet connection because that is the only access available. It is so slow at the moment, that I cannot even load my account information to see what the exact cost it.

In the 5 miles to get from my home to the post office, I cross 5 bridges. Really not sure how else to deal with all the running water that needs to be crossed.

Honestly curious, what did you use it for?

It may not make a difference in your argument, but it is worth noting that Fuchsia is currently open source: https://github.com/fuchsia-mir....

This is where we disagree. Someone had to define the functions (NB. many functions include constants in their definition). From what you have said, I can derive two possible definitions of "standard". The first being functions you expect people to know. This is not a reproducible definition because what you expect is not likely to be the same as what another individual expects. For example not everyone knows the inverse trig. functions. The second interpretation would be functions that are externally defined such that the definition can be looked up. To me, this does not provide any clear restrictions on the mathematical domain, opening up for all sorts of tricks:

naming f(x) was only for convenience, I could have written it as:
((lambdan . (n + pi)) 4+4-4-4) [lambda should be the lambda character, but /. does not seem to display it.]

Valid math. Everything is externally defined. Sure it is technically still an arbitrary function, but then I could also argue repeated application of a function you consider "standard" is also an arbitrary function. I do not see what grounds is there are for disallowing an entire mathematical system, but if you did, then I'd re-write it using currying notation. If you disallow that too, then I might try restating it using category theory. This continuing shows the distinction is arbitrary.

I think you overstate the distinction.

Let f(x) = x + pi (NB. we just curried addition) Therefore, 4+4-4-4+pi = f(4+4-4-4).
Indeed, that part at the end was just some mathematical function. In fact, lambda calculus could be used to show all all your constants are functions.

I am not saying that opening up the problem beyond arithmetic is consistent with the spirit of the question, just pointing out the once the metaphorical flood gates are open, the distinction between what is and isn't allowed is not simple.

Opera and Opera Mini have built-in ad blockers.

Am I the only one that read the title thinking the data was recovered?

So appoint the chimps as members of a corporation?

Here I liked Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship better than Pragmatic Programmer. I guess it just seemed a little more modern to me, though in general the knowledge of both was timeless.

I may have to go back and read Code Complete, it was thick and seemed to cover topics I had already read or been reading about in other other books, so I passed it over.