asfdsfggtfd

1. Nice bindings already exist for numerical libraries in python. It is more accurate in some ways to say that scientists are using a domain specific language based on numpy than they are using python.

2. The choice is either "fastest possible" or "I just don't care how long it takes" - for either development or run time. There is usually no middle ground.

3. Tooling - the scientist is most likely using a text editor not an IDE (especially when they start working). Fortran and python are both low enough on boilerplate to not need IDE support.

4. Abstraction level. Scientists in general don't bother care about abstraction level at all. Procedural programing's abstractions are usually more than enough for them (and may actually be the correct level for some numerical work - think cache misses vs. hits).

5. Some areas of science do use Java (check out imagej for example).

> You can create any number of moral structures that would allow for torture that still do not allow for indiscriminate violence.

They do however allow for someone to sit down and decide in a quiet methodical way they they are about to deliberately injure another defenseless human being.

> So your moral system requires that its adherents view incompatible or competing moral structures as inferior. So what? They can do the same to yours.

In some cases yes. For example anyone that justifies torture or slavery.

Maybe I did make a small error which would clarify things. s/Most of the moral decisions western society/Most of the decisions that stand the test of hindsight as having a moral basis that societies have taken/

Whereas your position seems to be - things are a little bit shit anyway so what is the harm in making some more bad decisions.

> As I understand your comment, you're saying that there is no "morally justifiable" moral framework under which torture would be acceptable. Other people here obviously disagree, using e.g. the trolley problem as an example scenario - would you torture 1 person to save X people from death? This is a legitimate moral question, and I don't think it's anywhere near "decided" at this point.

This is not a relevant question. There is a simple question - are you prepared to hurt the person tied down in front of you in cold blood?

All the structures you describe are what I what define as living in a moral vacuum...

Only if you live in a moral vacuum.

EDIT: Most of the moral decisions western society has taken about how we show act are on the principles of first doing no harm and respecting the rights of the individual. This ranges from medicine to the principle of innocent until proven guilty and using the legal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.

By torturing someone you are defying almost every moral decision societies have ever made.

EDIT AGAIN: Wow just wow. Heavy heavy downvoting for speaking against normalization of torture. Please explain yourselves?

> On this subject, I'd also seriously recommend that people take advantage of the holes on the bottom, or rear, of your safe. Those are so you can secure the safe to the building.

In UK you are required to attach the safe to your building. Using those holes is not optional!

It basically makes containers useless for developing webapps with role based permissions where mobile usage is required (all apps in 2017).

Agile can be used in such a way that it gets management off the developers backs and empowers the developers to take their own decisions about how to plan their work and their time and to control how feature requests end up in their personal to do list (i.e. the feature request has to wait until the next sprint).

Things that help are:

1. Having a project manager with at least several other projects to manage (discourages micromanagement).

2. The project manager should also be good at defending the dev team from distractions by triaging incoming requests into urgent bug fixes vs. waits until the next sprint planning meeting.

3. Having a product owner who does not act as a manager but as a consultant on a day-to-day basis (the dev team has to however appreciate that the producer owner is the person they are developing the software for). Ideally the product owner should be available but with some other work to be getting on with.

4. Having a professional development team that are more focused on delivering a product than building a CV/blog.

But responsive design mode doesn't work?

The thing you are looking for is about:profiles

There was a crisis around 2010 and this did not happen.

Agree that recycling is probably going to be important (as it is already with other metals).

The difference is that copper tends to be concentrated into minable deposits. REE tend to be spread out. Also comparing Ce with Cu is not totally fair the HREE are also important industrially and they are much rarer than the LREE - and tend to be less well concentrated into minable deposits.

A stutter is a disability not a sign of lack of intelligence/education.

What is the advantage of obscuring the algorithms used to detect fraud? (I.e. is this not just security by obscurity?)

We could also just pick a random person off the street and punish them - it would be similarly accurate and fair (actually probably fairer - if this is trained on pictures with a certain bias it will return pictures with that bias).

This paper does not demonstrate an enhancement technique but a phenomena which those using inverse methods called "overfitting".

You could also just pick a random license plate. It would be just as accurate.

>> You fundamentally can't get back information that has been destroyed/or never captured in the first place.

> I love this cliché. I've seen it thousands of times, and probably written it myself a few times. We all repeat stuff like that ad nauseam, without ever thinking.

It is not a cliche it is an absolute truth. Information not present cannot be retrieved. There may be more information present than is immediately obvious.

> Neural Nets are excellent in squeezing all the information out noisy data

Maybe but they are also good at overfitting onto noisy data (the original article is an example of such overfitting).

Hopefully never. This does not enhance the image - it makes up a plausible imaginary image.

EDIT: Furthermore the range of plausible imaginary images that match a given input is high (infinite?).

And side of me that studied history thinks that a society with control over (certain) information is one which is more vulnerable to control by bad actors...

I don't understand. Once someone knows that they are using these words wrong. Why would they not only persist but insist that everyone else is wrong? Is this just due to embarrassment or something else?

No it's not ignorance its willful ignorance. There is the actual definition. And then there is your personal definition.

This is like saying that personally you use the definition of kilogram to be 3.5 measures of flour using one of your cups. You would struggle when using other people's recipes and other people would struggle when using yours....

Software licensing is complex enough already. Why not keep it all simpler and use words as they are defined and understood by the lawyers who are the ones who actually have to deal with this side of things? Then us programmers can just write the software.

> not quibble over trivialities and semantics

I recommend just using the definitions of things correctly then :) much easier that trying to persuade other people that the definition does not exist.

When cooking I use the kilogram as defined by the SI system - I don't use some other random mass that I call a kilogram.

Similarly with software legalities. I also just use the standard terminology so other people e.g. my company's legal department gets the correct inference of what I am talking about. If you use it to mean something else you will confuse them.

> This is largely a subjective matter,

It just isn't subjective. "Open Source" is a technical term with a clear well understood meaning.

Lots of people get technical language wrong much the time. This is fine. Normally one does not correct heavily because one is polite. When one hears someone starting to spread the mistake one feels a duty to correct to prevent further misinformation. This is tedious but still fine.

What is not fine is when the person using the technical language wrong starts explaining that their ignorance is better than other peoples' knowledge.

This post is almost completely wrong.

You can indeed do what you like in the license (within the bounds of the law) but if it doesn't meet the OSI definition it is not Open Source.

This reads like Finland was a willing Nazi ally which is unfair. Finland fought a parallel war to the rest of the world. They spent the whole time defending themselves against invasion from Russia. When Russia was invaded by Germany their former allies stopped supporting them and they had to seek what help they could get.

Similar in UK. Insurers tell you never to say sorry for a car accident.

It can be used for interactive widgets as well.

In the Facebook case this is supported by Facebook themselves. mbasic.facebook.com :)

Presumably this occurs when the site uses a CDN for their js libraries (or even their main js). After a few days you start to spot which domains need to be enabled and which can be safely ignored.