Help your neighbors all you want. Who's stopping you?
Help your neighbors all you want. Who's stopping you?
Fuck you too, leftard.
We can fly to Mars, but we can't install planet-sized plumbing?
You're trolling, right? Nobody is even proposing to fly to Mars any time soon. You aim yourself at mars and you coast for a long-ass time. Maybe by the time we have the tech to accelerate at 1G halfway to Mars and decelerate at 1G the other half the way to Mars, we'll have the tech to run a fiberoptic link through the mantle. But... probably not.
Because China is the oil industry's favorite whipping boy these days.
Granted, you're not making it worse in any way by representing it with a union.
More to the point, you can't make it better by avoiding using a union. Because it's optimum as is.
The right tool for the right job.
pretty much the essence of obscure legacy cruft.
The job is the job. I have no problem using the right tool for the job.
You are just reinventing machine language where data, instructions, and address pointers can be mixed willy-nilly.
Because machine language varies hugely, and c varies little or none, when working on one platform and then another, c is a convenient low-level way to get as many advantages of working close to the metal (obvious ones are speed and executable size) as possible.
Higher-level languages merely try to introduce discipline and consistency to such practices.
Yes, they do. And in the process, they often cause the resulting product to suffer in speed and/or execution size (and the source code in clarity.) When "mere" means "the product is less good", I translate it as "not mere."
There are reasons to go one way or another. It's not as simple as "HLL's are always better." Sometimes even machine language is the best place to go, embedded controllers with limited storage and small tasks that must be accomplished efficiently, for instance.
impartial journalism is entirely possible.
It's certainly possible, but if you can actually show me an instance of it, I'd be quite surprised. I don't recall seeing such a thing. Ever.
There's selection bias, where the story that is told is not the only story, and/or leaves out pertinent details that variously pollute the information transfer to the information consumer. This occurs at the publisher, editorial, reporter and information source levels.
There are errors in collecting information, which can be characterized as "impartial but wrong" which entirely undermines the value of "impartial."
There's the social underpinning, such as the assumptions by the platform from publisher down to reporter buy into memes like the drug war, human trafficking, mommyism, military adventurism, etc. as right and proper undertakings and tell stories in the context of the presumptive matrix that results from those memes.
There's ad-pumping, where the advertising pays more money in when more eyes are attracted, which creates a loop based on popularity rather than accuracy.
There's comment "moderation", where "I disagree / am offended / am trolling" can strongly affect visibility of information -- depending on the site, that can come from privileged (and usually wholly unqualified) individuals, as here on slashdot, or from the crowd, as on reddit.
It all adds up to an extremely formidable gauntlet that information has to run in order to get from wherever it arises over to the consideration of the consumer.
And, not that it's part of the problem of actually achieving impartial journalism, but were you to completely get past every aspect of that somehow, then you still have to find an impartial audience or all that work is for nothing.
IOW, if you manage to present the facts, all the facts, nothing but the facts, and your audience cries "fake news" or drags prejudice, superstition, confirmation bias, or anything from a very long list of similar cognitive failure modes into it, well, there you go. You might as well have written an SF novel.
If there's anything I've learned about journalism in the last 41 years, it's that everyone puts their own slant on it.
o Publishers - slant, selection bias
o Advertisers - selection bias on source and slant by rewarding max eyeballs
o Editors - slant, selection bias for stories
o Reporters - slant, selection bias for sources
o Information sources - slant, winners get to write history
o Reader's choice of media - slant, selection bias
Scan through a big folder of 20MP+ photos, what happens to your application cache? Quite possibly evicted.
Intel is probably smart enough to use a hybrid MFU technique rather than MRU. They might set aside a portion or percentage for MRU to speed up ongoing operations, but I don't think they're dumb enough to run the whole cache on that basis.
It's a dumb product because who has a HDD in their Kaby Lake system?
The easiest way to see price discrimination is to go to the rich side of town and go to the grocery store. Observe the price of milk, hamburger, cheese and gasoline. Now to to the poor side of town, repeat.
OK, I'll bite. The poor side of town has a Grocery Outlet and a local market called a Bruno's. The expensive side of town (such as it is) has a Safeway. Guess what? The prices are better on the cheap side of town. What were you trying to prove again? (Also, our Safeway is fucking disgusting. About half the time you walk in there, you can smell the fish counter... ACROSS THE STORE. And sometimes it's gackworthy. I wouldn't even go in there if my landlord's bank weren't in there.)
What I do notice is that gasoline is often cheaper in more affluent neighborhoods. But that's because those people are willing to drive to somewhere else to fuel up. It's not magic.
Slashdot is making progress. I'm glad to see a discussion on electric cars on this forum where no-one is whining "electric cars will never work, you can't go more than 200 miles without needing to refuel... customers don't want electric..." etc,etc,et.
Yes, it is truly sad how many Slashdotters are so vastly behind the times. They should really fuck off back to CNET where they apparently came from
The US should do similar to put an end to all of these competing charging formats and vertical markets. It's not like Tesla will lose out because they stand to profit regardless of which vehicle is charging at their stations.
You are Just Plain Wrong. The Supercharger network is a competitive advantage. Since no one else offers that, and no one else can charge at those points, as long as Tesla has it and nobody else does, it is a significant inducement to buy Tesla instead of something else. Thus, this is the time for Tesla to lobby against such a move. When other makers have similar networks, then Tesla will want to lobby for charge connector standardization, because that will force them to let Tesla customers use any charger. Once it's no longer a competitive advantage, then it becomes a drawback. Right up until then, it's a massive benefit and they would have to be total idiots unqualified to operate any business to change that part of their game plan.
Newsflash, expensive high speed non volatile memory is always best used as a cache till the price comes down. News from 1960.
Society wants wealth redistribution
Speak for yourself. Some of us want to keep what we earn, not steal from our neighbors.
Memory fault -- core...uh...um...core... Oh dammit, I forget!