Yes, the -gate habit comes from the Watergate scandal. Watergate was during Richard Nixon's second term as president, in 1972-4. He was a Republican, and resigned the presidency before he could be impeached. The name comes from an attempted break in at the Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington DC that ended up uncovering a whole pile of shady stuff Nixon had been up to.
Are Americans actually this ignorant of their own history?
declaring that it meets government security and legal standards.
It certainly sounds like they lowered the standards if they are now allowing software with entirely undefined behavior to be used.
Aw, I'm disappointed there's no reply on Zuckerberg's origins.
Everything's an AI artifact. It's not like lazy people who slept through high school chemistry have been punching unit conversions into calculators for generations.
it's not orbiting the earth
It does orbit Earth on occasion before returning to orbit the Sun. TFS isn't very clear about that fact.
You can use the UV light. You need different material with a different bandgap. Basically a whole other panel, stacked on the first. But before you go after that 5% UV you're going to want to go after the blue, and probably the red and some of the near IR.
They're called multijunction solar cells and they're used in places where you need maximum efficiency, like in space. For regular use, single junction cells are much more popular because a single bandgap panel absorbing at the maximum solar emission is going to be more efficient price-wise than a multijunction cell where the extra bandgaps are in lower emission ranges.
Per the actual discussion identifying the object, it is a quasi-satellite. I think the moon related naming comes from the general public thinking of satellites as being man-made objects in Earth's orbit. However, plenty of publications have referred to such objects as being quasi-moons, including writers for The Planetary Society.
https://www.planetary.org/arti...
Quasi-moons
Earth’s quasi-moons get their name because, from a certain vantage point, they appear to act like moons. But from a wider perspective, it becomes obvious that they aren’t actually moons at all — they’re asteroids.
Oh dear, I'm sorry I didn't read this before replying above.
Zuck was one of several government projects along the same lines back then, and he got lucky, that's all.
So is he a CIA operator indoctrinated from birth a la The Bourne Identity, a genetically programmed clone, or a straight up android?
"Free market" is a stupid propaganda cliche that is devoid of meaning.
Uh huh. Is this one of those "propaganda I don't believe" Instagram slideshows?
Free markets exist and are pretty widespread. They require government intervention to maintain. Adam Smith himself called that one of the primary functions of government in the economy. American corporatism isn't the only system in the world, and authoritarian "democratic oversight" as suggested by the OP is definitely not a good alternative.
When you read "AI" on Slashdot, or in a business article, it's almost certainly a language model made by one of a handful of companies.
If it's about Nvidia it might have something to do with robots.
Free market capitalism has as a core principle the importance of market forces. That is, democracy.
Zuckerberg gained control of billions of dollars because he correctly judged that the people wanted to play hot or not with pictures of their friends and would accept psychological manipulation in return. He spent billions on VR because he thought it would work even better.
If you're American, "democracy" has had lots of opportunities to spend money on health care and does so to considerable excess.
Each one is a memory safety fail... it is, just like the rest of C++ not memory safe.
Like I said, you have to go out of your way to screw up. I never claimed it was perfect, only that you have to do something particularly dumb to break it. There is always going to be idiots in the ER because they used a tool the wrong way.
I find it funny that so many C++ devs seem to think using smart pointers means you are memory safe.
Safer, yes. Perfectly safe, no. When you build a fool-proof system then someone will build a better fool.
check what the "safe C++" proposal set out to change
I did. I even explained why it wasn't chosen. It's no panacea and as someone else pointed out, safe subsets of C++ exist.
The GGP was demonstrating how using ellipses to remove half of a post could make it sound silly. I was agreeing with them by demonstrating that it also works on single words.
OP was talking about a "powerful" GPU. There ain't no free lunch. You don't get magical heat and power benefits from putting a chiplet in a package with a CPU versus it's own little plastic house. Quite the opposite, at least where heat is concerned.
Qt's memory management is entirely based on using shared pointers. Honestly, it's kinda hard to screw up with Qt, like you have to go out of your way to screw up. i mean, other than failing to specify a parent object, how are you having memory issues in Qt?
Promising costs nothing, it's the delivering that kills you.
