Comment Re: Tim Cook should have taken Elon Musk's Call (Score 1) 244
It's call "context". Were you home schooled or are you that stupid naturally?
It's call "context". Were you home schooled or are you that stupid naturally?
You do realize that nothing you've written contradicts my post, right? Just how stupid are you?
Also, your stalking is getting creepy. Go fixate on someone else.
Nobody cited ratings from consumer reports,
You say that like I can't just scroll up:
It's actually based on [...] and each of those vehicle's ratings in consumer reports.
You're trying to gas light someone when there's a clearly visible record. You're beyond pathetic.
There are very few people as incompetent as you are. Keep that in mind. Now run along. You've wasted enough of my time.
You can't save this. Just read over this thread. You're twisting yourself in knots! You're only making yourself look worse.
It's obvious to everyone here that you're an idiot. That surfing bit also makes you look really insecure. I almost feel bad for you.
Now go waste someone else's time.
I very clearly stated an opinion based on my actual experience.
An opinion which you called a fact.
I know you have trouble reading, but you should at least have some understanding of what you wrote! Just how stupid are you?
yet as you confessed, you can't even go out into the rain without risk of drowning
Wow, you really are illiterate. Before you reply to me again, get an adult to help you. Better yet, don't reply to my posts. You have nothing of value to add.
Are you even aware of what you're posting? Holy fuck, you're stupid.
Whatever, I'll address this as well. I'll keep it as simple as I can. If you're still having trouble, get your caretaker to help you.
1) Your "personal experience" is in no way comprehensive. 2) You lack the expertise necessary to even to make an informed comparison. 3) You're couldn't make an objective assessment anyway as you're a delusional Elmo fanboi.
Try not to hurt yourself.
Because experience retires. Newbies get hired.
Leap days aren't some obscure fact about our calendar nor are they complicated to handle. A program to generate a calendar given a year or a function that can add days to a date is simple enough to be homework assignment. This shouldn't be a problem that requires wisdom and experience!
Do all languages have "libraries"?
A library is just a collection of routines. A standard library is a collection of routines that users can expect to be available. Odds are close to100% that whatever a beginner is using is going to have a standard library.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen. That's what the article is about, for goodness sake. I'm only saying that it's absurd that still happens.
Your claim was that "nobody does it [lane keep assist] as well as Tesla does". The overall rating from Consumer Reports, or anyone else, is irrelevant.
I don't get it either. This is a long-solved problem. There are very few reasons to write your own date code as the standard library for whatever you're using likely already has what you need. If for some reason you need to do this yourself, it's not difficult at all. There are just a few rules and they're trivial to code. It's the kind of project you might see as a homework assignment. If you can't handle that, maybe find a different profession?
Leap day breaking code... Unbelievable...
Apparently, this really is a thing. Who knew?
It used to be you could spot the skimmers by the little "no chip" note that was invariably taped over the slot to encourage you to swipe your card. Now, even the chip reader isn't safe.
Fortunately, all of my cards are contactless, which is a safe as it gets for now.
These don't work on a script.
Yes and no. While they're not following a choose your own support adventure script (yet) they are trained on a large corpus of text with the expectation that the output will remain consistent with that text. There are a lot of things you absolutely don't want your support bot to say, after all.
That's not easy to do, obviously, and it doesn't come cheap. A less expensive approach, and what I expect will quickly become the standard, is using the model not to generate responses, but to use the user's responses to move them through an ordinary support tree.
Putting bounds on it to try to keep it on a script will break it.
Nonsense. You don't want your support bot to waste time and money chatting about whatever. You want it to resolve the user's issue and get them off the phone as quickly as possible. That's why front-line support humans are made to follow a script.
I get the fantasy of replacing well-trained humans with chatbots, but it's just not realistic.
You're joking, but there's some truth in there. You really should avoid allocating and freeing memory as much as possible. You'd be surprised how often it's completely unnecessary and much it impacts performance.
When you can, there is absolutely nothing wrong with allocating everything up front. It gives you a lot of control over memory layout and can even simplify your program. I should probably point out that doing so does not mean "everything is a global". If you were thinking about stack allocation, unless you're going wild, I wouldn't worry about it outside of some very tight embedded systems. It does mean that you won't be able to treat memory like it's infinite, but that's a good thing.
Back in the old days, this is just what we did. We knew what we had to work with and planned accordingly. (That's another thing we did. Plan. It saved a tremendous amount of effort.) Did you ever wonder how we were able to show you a 20mb PDF on a system with only 4mb of ram? Unlike today, we didn't just read whole files into memory like the kids do, we read just what we needed at any given moment. Old file formats were designed to facilitate this, something rarely seen in newer formats.
At some point, I couldn't say exactly when, young developers (along with incompetent old ones) decided that not only do they not need to think about memory when using a 'memory safe' language, they shouldn't. As though it was some sort of affront to their dignity. It's no wonder modern software is so wasteful.
If conservatives were smart, they wouldn't be conservatives.
Anything is better than someone reading something they literally don't understand the meaning of as they say it.
You know that chatbots don't actually understand anything, right?
it will be far more knowledgeable than any script.
Don't be so sure. A lot of work goes into keeping these things on script. You absolutely do not want surprises in the output.
I expect that by the time the range of potential responses is narrow enough to be acceptably reliable and resistant to casual exploitation it won't be all that different from existing systems. Once the novelty wears off, my guess is that AI support bots will go over about as well as those automated phone systems that insist you speak an option rather than just press a button.
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk. -- Thomas Edison