160 karma · joined April 2, 2018
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_system_in_China
> I think providing a full perspective to those who are not as familiar with the topic can add to the discussion
I don't think you do. Making such an apples to nails comparison as the US prison system vs secret Chinese re-education camp is counter-productive.
> The number of people in the camps, which had fallen to 7,500, grew again to 21,000 by the start of World War II[8] and peaked at 715,000 in January 1945.[9]
I'm sure people around the world said something similar to "well, it's China and it's THEIR country, so that's up to them and we shouldn't be getting involved".
twitter reply: so he's guilty of "cansplaining"
- very funny stuff.
What a type is, depends on what the runtime operates on. You can make a runtime that just grabs random bits of data as a type and say "that's an integer" but it's not a useful construct/example. A runtime keeps track of types in some way external to the data itself. So I'll disagree that an all-zeros is not the same as a null, because it's a common way to initialize the data that is identified with a type (like in a pointer table). It's not a 1:1 but it's common. There's not always a formalized name, but it (an uninitialized state) always exists as part of the type system (when not reusing existing memory allocation, which is an initialized state). Always.
I think this is inaccurate. We are talking about computer science, which is important and a constraint around the general type theory. A type system is different than how you interact with it, so dispensing with language-specific symbolic representation further normalizes the discussion.
Fundamentally, a (computer science) type is a representation of binary, for the most part, data. That representation has to inhabit some part of bounded memory. When that memory is initialized (empty), it's some form of NULL, for a lack of another term. It exists for every type system in computer science.
> There are also variants that have separate NULL types for different base types, which also invalidate your claim
That's not the same thing. Different NULL types make sense for different sized discrete (fixed bounds) memory allocation. A unicode character has a fixed size allocation, while a string might be unbounded allocation (it grows in some fashion, as needed).
Edit: Kneejerk downvoting, classy.
Pareto Curve (more or less) of Y values on index X: [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,3,10,50,500,7000,9000000]
Index 30 is "off the chart"
Now revenue: $$*index
The correlation is linear (basically). The top youtuber who is a kid who reviews toys, makes the majority of his 22mil from ads, same as you or I would with <100 views per video.
He was a columnist for The Washington Post. He was known for having interviewed Osama Bin Laden a couple times.
News was slow and after the Chinese trade imbalance/conflict (finally someone stepped up to address it), so it looked like there was news to be had against another objectively-bad-government. Even if just to see what Trump might do to resolve (or sabotage) our uncomfortably close relationship. Nope, he just tried to promote it like the moron he is, in context of the assassination.
I really wish he woulda dumped another of these 19th century (depending on when they became stable) strategic allies, as I'm certain there's 0 chance the next POTUS will.
> Age has a definition.
Relativity explains that this definition is subjective, experimentally.
Astronauts experience time differentials and it will only get more obvious as we go farther. Again, the concept of granularity (how much of what matters from what perspective) applies in both cases - age and gender.
This isn't a justification. Resolve this philosophically however you like with one and I observe that it should be true in the other case.
Only in the vast majority of cases. There are XX, XY, YY, XXY, and even more esoteric versions!
I'm really frustrated when these kind of problems are presented as "whiteboard" problems. It's not constructive and discouraging to potential employees. When something as simple as "implement X without using Y" or "fix this program with pseudocode" are practically useful experiments and more indicative of what developers are doing to be doing ALONE every day. If there's inefficiency, code reviews and planning and integration all reveal that and you can pull in specialized resources if you really need it.
(the following is just inspired by your bullet)
The job of a developer consists of problem solving something they have never encountered before (under some pressure), communicating to other developers, and demonstrating knowledge in various combinations and amounts over time. Startup developers are the hardest spots to fill and most delicate, so I tend to always think as if I'm hiring for a startup.
Talking through a few whiteboard problems and talking about tools they have used (why and how) are sufficient. 30-45 minutes. I don't subscribe to adding more elements (environments, tools, test frameworks, etc). 3 people, 1 from the destination team, 1 from another team (if possible) and the immediate manager.
Startups to multinational corporations, I'm still convinced this is the best way over the last 20 years.
Interviews with higher management is just a redundant filter and another reason for the management to justify their existence. It's a job smell that every company has and is obviously prejudicial in every regard (trying to tease personal details or redundant workflow experience and opinions). It's a bad practice.
If the US government was threatened, the plan is the same as it always was. Lock everyone up who is tacitly related to the "others" eg American Indians, Japanese internment, McCarthy.
https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/credit-education...
I was an undergrad, which still puts us both above the vast majority in education.
I was taught differently in 1998.
There was the press coverage of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_(Australopithecus) which was referenced in a scene of https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2872732/
It can be said that it's a plot twist that was stoked for decades.
That's an opinion that isn't very popular or useful.
Ignoring the multithreaded PHP runtime and fork functionality, implementing every feature (whatever user X particularly wants) in every language will never happen.
Saying OOP is a broken paradigm is irrelevant. Some people prefer it and they are users just like you, but different too.
So the initial assertion was not compelling.
> it is rate of change which has people concerned.
Do you have any source about people being concerned (what people?) for the new goalpost?
I think all totalitarian and contested land should be delisted, but this might be a "testing the waters" act.
This statement _in_the_article_ nods to that idea. I think the statement is more than fair.
Moving the goalpost to more specific information, weakens the employer position. Now they are no longer interviewing potentially qualified people, but interviewing people trying to intentionally pass themselves off as specializing in a few skills. Weak hiring practices are the norm, so the strategy of hiding information (the most valuable skills) benefits the employers. People are very good at faking skills at a cursory (or specific depth, like side projects), which is part of the reason Headhunters are derided, prepping both sides to fail for their own commission.
No, they don't. China doesn't even let AWS operate in China without having all the network traffic filter and land in China. Nothing about the Apple network is different. Still towers in China, still servers in China.
I'm interested in an example of an entire country run by a private entity that was not a dictatorship. It doesn't help that the terms "run" and "private entity" vary from person to person, but something akin to the HEIC - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_rule_in_India is what was conjured when talking about private entity rule.
> I don't know what you think adding that adjective is going to change, but sure.
I'm implying no readers/posters have "experience" as stated. The adjective is a clarification, in the case that there was something missed from the strange phrasing.
There's a psychological phenomenon:
Dictatorships are monopolies.
> by experience.
I think you meant historically. What ever did you mean by "theoretically"? Theory is less useful if it doesn't match practice anyway.
The USA is inept as an organization. In some areas, by design (eg Patent Office, various Courts, Gerrymandering). There are very few areas where it's not completely hypocritical and demonstrates externally rational behavior. "Using wikileaks" would require multiple departments coordinating. That's been impractical for decades.