Hah. I’d love to see a real world example where savings get passed on. Corporate profits are at record highs.

How does this benefit anyone but the Amazon execs? They get to save on labor costs. It doesn’t benefit me, the consumer. I already get my packages within a perfectly reasonable amount of time.

Stihl MS500i is a fuel injected chainsaw. I have no doubt fuel injection will make further inroads in the small engine market.

Are you a troll? Makita makes 2 stroke gas chainsaws. Stihl has a huge line of 2 stroke blowers. Observe: https://www.stihlusa.com/produ... The very common BR450 takes 50:1 mix.

That is completely wrong. As a chainsaw enthusiast, the 4 stroke models on the market are a complete joke in terms of power. Two stroke engines are necessary for the power and responsivity of a portable engine. To get similar performance out of a 4 stroke engine would greatly increase the weight of the system. And let me tell you, when you’re hauling the tool around in a hilly forest, you want the thing to be as light as possible.

Can you elaborate on this or provide me with some references? I never got into authoring Flash animations, but your comment has piqued my interest in the format and optimizations involved.

I think the better analogy is it is like using emacs to edit a large binary executable (something I've actually done before in trying to crack licensed programs). One would hope that, through a debugger, one has a good idea of what the edit is supposed to do in order to exact the changes expected. Even when I was pretty sure I understood what changes I needed to make, I was still not eliminating the license checks, and causing random crashes. I don't claim to be an expert at doing this. However, our biological understanding (the debugger) is currently similarly lacking, if not more so. We know that editing DNA sequences modifies the transcribed proteins, and that there are also epigenetic factors that are affected (which was only established relatively recently), among other things (possibly yet to be discovered). I personally believe it is presumptuous and premature to declare that consequences of edits are predictable, since there could be subtle long-term decades-later effects of edits, or perhaps consequences for progeny of those subject to gene editing.

What should be, and what is, as you point out, are two different things. I would rather be overly cautious in the case.

Absolutely. However, the consequences of those very predictable edits is not well understood.

Because it's not always clear they actually enjoy those houses. A lot of the motivation for buildding mcmansions is one-upsmanship. I've lived in the bay area more than 30 years now and I see fellow Chinese build these monstrosities to show the world their wealth. If you ask them about houses they decry the lack of privacy and lack of yard. It's infuriating to bystanders because they are garrish. It's like if your neighbor painted their house bright green. They build this castle that overlooks your house and your windows and absolutely does not fit in with the original look and feel of the neighborhood.

I couldn't agree more, especially for a language that deals with math and linear algebra. When accessing submatrices of matrices and doing advanced linear algebra manipulations, using 0 based offsets leads to far more natural indexing, reduces the need to constantly subtract and re-add 1, and leads to fewer chances to make silly errors.

There's suggestion that this is not the case: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI... Please do not continue to spread this rumor as it is just causing more harm.

And what if those aggressions and hatreds were directed at you or people you cared about? What if those anonymous comments threatened harm? How lightly then are you willing to take it? There's definitely a balance that needs to be struck between free speech and its control, and it seems to me Yik Yak does more harm than good.

On the point or portability, there's then a distinction of your focus. If you do research on numerical methods, then yes, you would write highly optimized code for a particular machine, as an end in and of itself. I myself am merely a user, and our research group does not have the expertise to write such optimized code. We pay for time on supercomputing clusters, which constantly bring online new machines and retire old ones. Every year our subscription can change, and we are allowed to use resources on different computers. Therefore, from my standpoint, portability is very important. Otherwise, if we were to write our own code in-house, we basically have a 1 year (ok, fine, maybe 2 or 3 year) window in which to develop, test, and run it. It just doesn't seem worthwhile to spend so much effort developing a one-time use piece of code. I'd rather write something which will outlive my stay in the research program.

As someone who does heavy duty scientific computing, I wouldn't say that "most" of the actual process power is in GPUs. They are certainly more powerful at certain tasks, but most applications run are legacy code, and most algorithms require substantial reworking to get them to run with reasonable performance on a GPU. Simply put, GPU for supercomputing is not quite a mature technology yet. I am personally not too interested in coding for GPUs simply because the code is not portable enough yet, and by the time the technology might be mature, there might be a new wave of technology (like ARM) that could be easier to work with.