5,809 karma · joined February 25, 2010
Here's a talk from an llvm conference with the details.
int sum(int n) {
int sum = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
sum +=i;
}
return sum;
}
clang, with -O2, will turn this into the polynomial (n+1)*n//2. It can also do similar transformations for multiple loops.https://godbolt.org/z/so6neac33
So if you do a brute force solution which could have been reduced to a polyomial, clang has a shot of doing just that.
Amazon was a company that was around and survived the dot com bomb (founded in 1994, roughly around the time of the beginning of the bubble) [though its stock took about 7 years to recover]
Facebook was post dot com bomb. (founded 2004)
Thank you for the additional context.
But nothing in the article supports that view. What has changed are cattle ranching practices that reduce the opportunity of attack. Everything that the article talks about is "How did cattle ranchers adapt to an ever present threat of pumas and jaguars without killing them (for reasons that are not well discussed beyond a reference to a government mandate)" rather then "We're best buds now!" or even "We have found utility in the jaguar and puma population that benefits us".
It seems the adapted practices are beneficial on their own, but it sounds like they would be beneficial without jaguars and pumas.
They can only rely on 3p devs if they allow access to the hardware.
"Employee badges" can be implemented in a number of ways, from simple broadcasted rfids down to having secret challenge responses that aren't breakable without going down the jlsca route since the secret is on the device and never leaves it.
So, step 1: figure out what exactly the model your 'employee badge' is using and what protocol it uses. There's probably some marking on it that should give you the manufactuerer at least.
Example usage (found randomly by google, likely can find others):
https://www.veterinarywoman.co.uk/2015/02/the-stale-pale-mal...
Interestingly, google's search results indicate the phrase may be (currently) a UK thing (based on the domains of the results).
The organization has existed and has had a need to find funding for it's activities. Since the question was about 'state' run entities, the goal of "making a profit" seemed not particular salient.
Honestly, I thought the more contentious part of this claim was going to be if the Church of Sinai constituted a state.
In the US at least, I'd say for most of the existence of the web, the prevalent idea was that the best way to counter 'bad' speech was more speech.
The concern over 'misinformation' has resulted in a lot of people, whom previously had advocated for unrestricted speech, calling for regulation or removal of section 230.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/02/opinion/misinformation-di...
Like many Zeitgeist trends, it is difficult to measure concretely and objectively, especially if it hasn't been tracked in the past. Especially when people's understanding of what constitutes "free" speech shifts over time.
If Acadia is engaged in insurance fraud, the insurance companies have every incentive to stop that.
You should write up a blog post where you had to debug some weird gnarly issues. A lot of us higher up the tech stack are pretty far removed from the signals level issues you're talking about but would love to hear about a low level debug session!
int getSpecialArrayElement(char *array, uint64 key) {
i = computeOffset(key);
return array[i];
}
Compute offset can be arbitrarily complex (and probably deliberately hard to analyze if obfuscation is desired). There's nothing that prevents this function from accessing arbitrary locations in memory. You don't know if this will be accessing symbols that are already defined in memory by the linker short of exhaustively trying all possible inputs (and computeOffset may have turing traps for that).Can they achieve equal or better results than a tutor? That's a separate question, but that's the market they're in.
I'd like to point out (for others following along) that the Pauli exclusion principle isn't actually a separate rule (That is, something you'd have to apply after you do 'normal' physics). What is happening with the PEP is that if you start off with a wavefunction that has fermionic symmetry (that is, interchange of two particle swaps the sign of the wavefunction), the evolution via the Schroedinger equation will preserve that (much like it preserves the Integral(|psi|^2)=1 relation). Same for bosons.
So if you're writing a Quantum physics simulator, you don't need to put in a "Pauli Exclusion Rule" step.[1]
[1] Though depending on your representation you may toss one in for numerical stability.
I'm always happy to hear that there are people saying these sorts of things in the military. I'm sorry it wasn't fun at the time, but the Safety Officer really was looking out for you. You really don't want to be the unexpected cautionary tale, like Bob.
https://www.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/trace-event-prof...
It looks like though the old catapult code has been officially deprecated, and they're recommending switching over to Perfetto.
https://github.com/google/perfetto
So anyhow, I just learned about the perfetto switch, so I won't try and dig up a link to the old way of formatting your traces to work with chrome://tracing, as it sounds completely deprecated. Go use Perfetto if you want a fairly easy way of interacting with trace data. I assume it's at least as good and useful as chrome://tracing.
Sure, pick a large prime. Double it and add 1 (and call it n). If it's still prime, then you know the prime factorization of n-1. Pick your generator, and check if it raised to the p is 1, or if squaring it is one. If not, it's a generator of the multiplicative group mod n.