I can't tell if you are serious or not, but their Zen architecture should be dropping soon, and they at least in theory have caught up with the Intel CPUs of a generation or two ago.
If they have a good price point, they might start actually giving Intel some competition, which is good, since Intel has done next to nothing very interesting since the Ivy/Sandy Bridge days.
I teach classes using the Raspberry Pi 2 (soon to be switching to 3, I hope) in a variety of contexts, such as with students wanting to learn ARM assembly and to K-12 teachers who want to do physical computing in their science classrooms.
It feels to me like the RPi is focused a little too much on Python and Scratch. I understand that it's called the Pi because of Python, but ARM assembly is my favorite assembly language, and bare metal assembly in particular is just a really natural fit for physical computing due to how easy it is to turn GPIO pins on and off. But the lack of documentation for the newer Broadcom SoCs has made it difficult for my students to write bare metal projects. So this leads to my question for you: are there any plans on rolling out better documentation / support / code examples for assembly on the RPi 2 and 3?
Despite this sounding like grousing, I would like to assure you that I love everything you've done with the Raspberry Pi and the notion of physical computing in general. Everyone who takes an assembly class or science technology workshop with me this year will get a free RPI3 and a bunch of sensors, wires, and motors to do hands-on, open ended projects. And I've been doing this for a while and it works really well. Thanks again for all of your vision and tireless effort you've spent in this arena.
And as someone who thought they'd got it right as of somewhere in 4.x and dislikes the direction 5.x is going, I wish they'd stop "improving" it. Just fix anything that ails it, stop fucking with the interface and removing features, egads. That's why I no longer even try Gnome-based distros; can't stand the giant cellphone it's become.
Interesting from a grazing efficiency standpoint. I do wonder what it does to total gut balance and mortality in the event of scours or other pathogenic processes.
But as to the nominal topic... in North America, there used to be about 20% more bison than there are cattle today. Bison mass about double what cattle do, and eat proportionately more -- therefore farted more, probably producing about twice as much methane in total. Somehow this failed to cause global warming.
.... you were in B.C., where it snowed last week. Was supposed to snow here in parts of Montana as well but I haven't seen whether it happened. But this is probably the coldest August I've seen... lows down to 45F this past week.
I don't think at all that man hasn't affected the climate in a way that tends to disturb equilibrium.
I'm not convinced, however, that a single global average temperature is a meaningful metric. Since climate is varied enough across the globe, that single metric seems to lose too much information. Far too much information averaged together.
For instance - yes the average has increased, but is that more or less important than the change in range of max to min temperatures? How does that vary with geolocation? If we know some areas are going to get better climates, why not start putting infrastructure there now to mitigate the "horrors of mass migration" in a few decades?
That's what bugs me about the "global" number - the effects are not equally distributed, so averaging everything together into that one number, while perhaps helpful in some broad sense, doesn't correlate directly enough with useful actions (especially because in general it affects probabilities or trends, not "concrete" events for enough people to understand).
Changes in tax codes and more importantly, zoning laws are probably required. Trouble is, they are linked in an environmentally-unfriendly way: in the area in which I live, I've seen at least 100 acres of easily observable (i.e. next to a road) land converted from forest to either shopping centers or stupidly expensive residential ("starting from the $800s") in the past year.
There are also at least another 600 acres of mixed farm/forest for sale zoned residential/"big box commercial" within 15 miles of road I drive once a week.
Farmland isn't particularly cooling, but converting it to shopping centers isn't going to make it better. Chopping forests is worse.
So forget about all the nonsense about driving a greener car, or changing incandescent to CFL to LED - until communities start realizing that turning farms and forests into paved areas is bad for the environment in a way that is worse than the property and sales tax incomes they are going to get, things aren't going to change. It's even worse because land development is typically seen as "bringing jobs" and progress. But it's got to be done wisely...Turn scrubland into things you need, not arable land or forests.
You want real change? Get on your community zoning boards. It doesn't even take magic technology!
>A lot of tech people tend to forget that for most people, a computer is not an end unto itself. It's just another tool for getting their real work done. Why "advocate" a desktop if people can get their work done on a tablet or phone? A desktop system has a lot of complexity that, for most people, probably tends to get in the way of actually getting their work done as much as it helps them.
Tablets and phones are consumption devices, not creation devices. They are a hideously bad match for trying to do any sort of serious development work, or even your bog standard PowerPoint deck. A Surface is about as tablet-y as you can get while still being able to do reasonable work, but a Surface is still a real computer under the hood. Anyone who works with touch-only systems could probably give you a long list of design decisions that slow them down when trying to do anything serious.
>I'd argue that very few people's productivity is measured in how efficient their file operations are. It's sort of like believing you're going to be vastly more efficient as a programmer if you memorize a bunch of keyboard shortcuts or type 60wpm instead of 30. Unlike the movies, programming isn't about how fast you type.
I think his point isn't just doing file operations, but rather that everything from the CLI is going to be faster and more powerful than a GUI when you know what you're doing. GUIs are great when doing graphical stuff, but for text-based work, text-based interfaces work better. UNIX is an operating system that is also an integrated development environment.
And typing fast really does make a difference. I mean, sure, Amdahl's Law and everything, but when you know what you're going to do, your typing speed will linearly translate into productivity.
Yes, they have that now. A revised system might change that. Not much good (other than just commiseration) lamenting about what is if there is no proposal for something different...
The wording of this post made me realize something - what we need isn't "more diversity" - what we need is "less systemic discrimination". Those are subtly different things. You can have zero systemic discrimination and still have relatively homogenous-in-some-attribute populations in particular vocations or geographic areas. Conversely, you can have heterogenous populations and still have massive systemic discrimination.
I think people are confused as to what "production quality code" actually means...
Also, LinkedIn has been rather less annoying than the alternatives. I can actually find people there, should I wish. And apparently they can find me. Nearly all have been people I know -- not getting the who-the-hell?? so common in followers elsewhere.
I guess I don't consider throwing out evidence to be "punishment".
But what I see here is a bunch of comments saying "yeah, but that doesn't actually happen...". Of course, that's the point of the discussion. But saying "Our current stuff is abused, but you can't put in place other protections because they will just be abused as well" is just specious - it doesn't help anything.
All the rebuttals have been "but nobody will actually punish illegally gathered evidence" is silly, because that's just stating "if you have a system that says you must punish those gathering evidence illegally, people won't follow that system" which is essentially a lawless society in the first place. That's what you've got to fix - make punishment of illegal search and seizure automatic not optional - don't give a judge or executive the option to waive it.
Exactly. Its function is as a business card kiosk, where you WANT people to take your "card" (info), to remind your fellow professionals that you exist, and maybe let other professionals find you.
If you're using it for personal info, you've misspelled "Facebook".
The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. The haves get more, the have-nots die.