If true, this is the modern-day version of a Letter of Marque, with the slight (cough cough) difference that the United States and China are neither technically at war (like N. and S. Korea) nor actually shooting at each other (like the various non-declared wars/hostilities the US has been involved in after WW2).
the green thing to do is build products on the continent they will be sold on.
If the raw materials are all on one continent, the end users are on another, and the finished product is less massive than the raw materials, it's going to require less shipping to build it where the raw materials are then ship it to the customer.
Also, what about things like coffee, that simply don't grow everywhere they are consumed?
If I read this right, ancient seafaring peoples had the same problem, just on a much smaller scale.
"No, you can do the equivalent work of earning a _DEGREE_ (minus the non-technical classes) by on-the-job experience or self-study without earning a degree and still be a good developer."
Sorry about that.
My keyboard dropped out of college shortly before graduation. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
But you need a degree to be a good developer.
No, you can do the equivalent work of earning a (minus the non-technical classes) by on-the-job experience or self-study without earning a degree and still be a good developer.
"4 year CS degree or equivalent education or experience or combination thereof" is a much more rational hiring criteria than "4 year degree."
We may not have a "trades system" but we do have privately-run certification systems that are separate from university degrees.
Think of an entry-level CompTIA/Microsoft/Cisco/OtherMajorBrand certification as apprentice-level. You can move up from there and specialize without needing to go to a college or university.
... are belong to us
recent app update to improve the
Fail.
For $299 I want as close to an original-part-by-part reproduction, not an FPGA cheat.
For an FPGA cheat, just publish everything open-source and sell a completed product for those that don't want to DIY.
I'm willing to compromise a bit on the FPGA front for individual chips that are unobtainum, have no modern substitute, and not cost-effective to recreate in small-ish quantities. However, the substitute chip should be pin-compatible and of course timing-and-everything-else compatible with the original. In other words, if I had a bin of original parts and a bin of the FPGA substitutes, I should be able to use either one in a rebuild without noticing the difference. The motherboard, connections, and feasible-to-reproduce parts should be faithful reproductions of the original.
I'm hope this product is successful, but it's just not for me.
it's still just the 2025 version of a 1960s-era IBM, DEC, Honeywell, HP, DG, and Wang* saying majority of our new code is written by compilers where code = stuff the computer that will run the code understands.
Today's AI-generated source code is 60-years-ago's compiler output. Compilers have bugs, and so does AI.
* and Amdahl, NEC, and NCR too
That is not exponential growth.
Exponential growth can be very slow in the short term. Your savings account that pays 0.01% interest each year is growing exponentially, but you won't get rich off of it in a typical human lifetime.
with an AI algorithm matching those signatures to exact locations
How does it compare against non-AI algorithms matching those signatures to exact locations?
If you are going to build a power-sucking data center, at least put SOME solar + battery nearby so you aren't straining the local grid (as much).
Algorithms that put "possibly interesting" things in my feed that I didn't specifically subscribe to need to have some "dampening"/"negative feedback" built in to reduce the chance of "runaway algorithmicly-generated virality," much like a steam engine has "negative feedback" to prevent an explosion.
If a post or topic or poster is starting to "go viral," the algorithm needs to dampen/partially-squelch the post/topic/poster so it appears less in people's algorithmicly-generated feeds.
Of course, if I'm subscribing to/following the content or it was sent directly to me, then this doesn't apply. If the post is going viral organically, without any help from algorithm-generated feeds, that's good, that's the way it should be.
So many things depend on dates that it would be irresponsible to assume nothing would go wrong until proven otherwise.
Also, GParted itself calls fsck for some operations. It's very likely that at least some file systems' fsck.* tools use or check dates and would prevent a successful fsck under certain postend-of-epoch scenarios.
I could easily be wrong here, but the rational assumption is to assume something could go wonky under certain post-rollover scenarios until someone proves it can't.
An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.
