alain94040

The role of a judge is to sort through these contradictions to decide which principles are more important than others, even though they are all mentioned in the constitution.

So I don't see how there is an objective concept of "originalist": you have to pick some principles over others. Which ones you pick are a lot more guided by your own ideology than by the words on paper.

I work for company A, I'm starting to get slightly bored or interested in doing something else. Without quitting my job, I contribute a few days of code to company B, whose project I find interesting. As I contribute more to company B, I eventually quit company A and join company B full-time.

Benefits of this approach: no interviews. Know what you are getting into. Try different things and what works for you.

How can we make this work: legal framework. California, if you are listening, pass a law that prevents companies from exclusive work arrangements, so I can always do a side-gig with company B even if they are competitors. Have company B compensate me, so we don't end up in a situation where company B is abusing job seekers by getting free work done. Maybe a law could say that I'm safe as long as my work for company B while employed by company A doesn't exceed 5% of my salary or so.

Would that work?

No variable-length instructions. No arithmetic instructions that can take memory operands, shift them, and update their address at the same time.

Without that instruction, your hardware design could have assumed that reverting state can always be done in one cycle. That makes the hardware implementation easier.

If instead you had executed 16 separate LD instructions, all of them would have retired and update state by the time the last one gets the bus error.

It’s all doable of course, but it means your OOO algorithm and physical implementation need to handle a lot more state in flight.

Adds just enough friction to reduce downvotes a bit, provides information to the person being downvoted (no more "why all the hate?" comments), and doesn't pollute the experience for everyone else, since those are not visible by most users.

It had a very interesting effect: no one wants to be paid in the bottom 50%, so every job offer (at the executive level) claims to pay in the top 75% or so. Which led to salary inflation.

I'm very curious to see if the same would happen here (and I think it started to happen somewhat with sites such as level.fyi sharing salary info). If you see (in aggregate) what others get for similar positions, you are more likely to get an offer above that average. Which over time, leads to everyone getting raises.

Revenue is seriously down. If this trend continues for another quarter or so, we'll have to start layoffs of ~10% of the engineers.

Do you share the full news now, with no idea of whether there will be layoffs? Do you "lie by omission" by sharing that revenue is down, but not mention the potential consequences?

The CEO typically is hoping for one more deal to close, to turnaround the company and not have to go through the layoffs. Why scare people if it's not needed?

Campaign manager to sales team: we did two experiments in cities A and B. We won't tell you what we did. Go look at the sales numbers, and tell us if you see improvements in sales in those cities. Then we can share what we actually did.

Therefore most formal methods blow up on cpu designs and random coverage is really hard to define and even harder to reach.

And it's not clear that the copy is used in a commercial way. If the app is free, maybe they follow your full conditions?

From that definition, it's quite obvious that everything you compute has to be continuous, because you are never sure of what other decimals may be coming up, so whatever you compute has to be close enough.

That sounds more like an argument that representing numbers that way is not particularly useful since you can't do much with them (you can't even provide an equality operator).

Your grandpa could use it to secure his crypto wallet.

[1] https://www.keopass.com/index_en.html

Now that the future is here, people are complaining that they need to sign up for too many streaming services. Why can't I just pay once for a bundle and get everything I need?

I'm just as guilty as everyone else, I don't have a good answer...

That doesn't sound right. Neither AMD nor Intel get more than a handful of GB/s in basic memory I/O? Any idea what could be wrong?

This is the clever idea of this paper. They assume that there are at least two compilers say {X} and {Y}. Then let {A} be the output of {X(P)} and let {B} be the output of {Y(P)}. The key insight is: If {A} is not equal to {B}, then one of the compilers is wrong.

Seriously? It's called having a reference, and comparing your fancy compiler against a reference to make sure the results match.

That's the entire insight of that article, after spending half a page discussing the order of authors in a paper.

Really weird.

Just like we humans: we first think of what we want to say (a few points about X, first Y, don't forget Z). Then turn those rough ideas into fully-formed sentences.

take the risk of asking for trouble while cycling on a cycling path with no other cyclists near me (within, say, 300m).

You don't know. If you start looking at your screen and you are moving, you are a danger to others. I don't care what happens to you, but I care that you don't hurt others. And you may.