I'd go for something edgier, like Blaze Pascal

Their market value would plummet and they would finally be bought by Oracle and dismantled.

From TFA:

It is not the first time that Periscope has been linked to inappropriate content.

Well it's not the first time Humans have been linked to inappropriate content.

Automatons can have illusions!

No, no, no! Not that compiled-to-machine-code crap!
The guy clearly said people need something lean and fast. Like the java virtual machine, for which you compile to BYTE CODE!!!1!

Not sure what you're disagreeing with me on. I never suggested that having vocabulary and a certain set of sounds was useless. In fact that's the one thing I said mattered most. My question was regarding the grammar (note the title of the comment). I asked what's the use of creating a sophisticated grammar, rather than using the simplest one.



For example, can you tell which one is klingon and which one has the words jumbled around? Can you tell the difference?

vavlI’ quv Say’moHmeH nuj bIQ vIlo’chugh nuj bIQ vIlammoH.
vavlI’ bIQ vIlo’chugh nuj quv bIQ vIlammoH nuj Say’moHmeH .

Have you ever worked on a project like a book/app/website/parallel reality game where the reader/player's role would be to decipher one of your synthetic languages, given clues? Does that sound like something you would consider doing?

Most people never bother to give a fictional language a second look, they only happen to listen to the way it sounds, in passing. This makes the vocabulary and the distribution of letters / letter combinations the most important part. What, then, is the point of working on the grammar and syntax of a synthetic language, rather than using simplistic ones? Is it for the benefit of the language geeks out there, is it art for art's sake, or does it affect our perception of that language in ways we don't necessarily see?

I find this work dubious for the fact that it's conclusion is (or can be reformulated as) a negative: there's not much difference between male and female brains. All this suggests is that the authors were unable to find a consistent algorithm for deciding whether a brain is male or female. Now there are whole disciplines which can come up with different ways to differentiate the two (most notably data science), so I propose releasing the data, and then we'll whether someone finds that algorithm, and how well it works. While the case can not be definitively proven to be that there's no difference, the degree to which male and female brains are different would give rise to some interesting discussion.

If accuracy is above 90% we can conclusively say that the two categories are pretty different. If it's around 66%, we would say the difference is minimal. Furthermore, the algorithms themselves would yield some interesting insights.

So if the authors are reading this, can we have the data please?

Especially since the article explicitly shoes in it's little infographic that IT unemployment went down from 2.3 in Q1 to 2.1 in Q2.

So the news here is that absolute Web Developer unemployment went from 2.1% to 3.1% and tech layoff rose by ~5%. That is a fluctuation of 1 month! Oh noes! What will we do!? That is ONE MONTH you statistically challenged clod.

And a summer month at that, when I assume new grads are coming into the market.

Do you guys seriously have the gall to call that journalism?

Can I just use the steering wheel as a controller while playing Need for Speed?

Over 1 trillion dollars for a war toy that doesn't even work is astounding. For comparison that's 10 Apollo programs. I don't mean 10 rockets, I mean ten times the whole research, development and 17 missions. For that kind of money, we could have gone to Mars or solved cheap solar energy.

Can research see if something can keep the share button away from slashdot?

Do you think removing the share button from slashdot could be in the cards?