> we do not understand them
You don't. I bet you don't understand how a coal or hydro plant works either. People operating them do.
1,979 karma · joined December 12, 2017
You don't. I bet you don't understand how a coal or hydro plant works either. People operating them do.
It's an appointment, so they would only have to convince the president. Or you can prevent reappointment at all.
They are only great at the point of purchase. They make it harder to run a competing business, they create a tax burden by paying low wages, they distort local markets and cause local economies to suffer, they benefit foreign suppliers of products produced at wages and in conditions below American legal minimums (at the expense of American companies that compete with them, which affects American workers at those companies).
This is probably not a real email to a client or meant to sound like one. Stop responding to it like that's what this is (and perhaps also, remember that satire and social criticism exist). It IS meant to highlight one of the common problems of software development for interested readers.
Do whatever works for you. But it's good to have more tools in our toolbox - use puts debugging if that's easier (often is in very complex environments), use a debugger if you need to.
This jives with engineering industries, where USC is a consistent producer of aerospace/mechanical and tech talent. USC is considered a top school in many other research fields as well.
I think it's more likely that you actually know very little about academics at these institutions.
Disclaimer: I work at UPenn (doing research!) and went to USC.
Our minimum wage being so low puts great strain on our social services (and if they didn't exist, the situation would be even worse - it would just be a reversion to what we saw before and during the great depression). Noone should be fully employed and still require food stamps and public housing vouchers, but that's the reality of today.
Now, this is certainly unfortunate. I'd prefer to submit my taxes electronically via simple forms on the IRS website instantly. But with the lobbying, this is what we're stuck with.
One day, maybe, this cowardly behavior will end.
All voice recognition and text prediction is a result of nlp. Every time you search on google, or say “hey Siri/Alexa”. Every time you call an automated service and it asks you why you’re calling and connects you to the right department. When you type a text message and it completes a word and predicts the next one. It affects what ads you get shown. It lets companies automatically block negative reviews with sentiment analysis (not always used for good). Or to quickly find where supplies are needed in emergencies by parsing twitter feeds in all languages. Etc.
If you own a smartphone, you interact with nlp technologies dozens of times per day. So yeah, it’s good and useful.
Absolutely right. I recently started a blog, and was disheartened to learn that I have sign up for accounts with several search engines, conform to their standards and rules, give them a bunch of data... and still sometimes have mysterious issues with indexing with no real recourse. How much time and effort do I really want to spend to play the seo game? I have a job, projects, and hobbies, I don't have the time or patience to play their game of "let's fuck with things randomly until you get indexed and ranked higher". That was fun for a few hours, but I'm done with it.
...why not both? :-)
But seriously, coffee is a drop in the bucket. Most of us spend 30% of our income on housing alone. And you have to eat. And coffee makes us happy and productive. The cost of not having that coffee - being unproductive and unhappy - is much greater.
And of course, what's the end goal? Have the most money at the end of your life? What do you win for that? Nothing. Your goal should be to spend all of your money living the best life you can, with enough money to retire on and enjoy the lifestyle you want (with a rainy day fund, of course). Teach your children what they need to know to succeed, so none will need to depend on any inheritance, and leave them whatever property or money is leftover.
This isn't a thing in the US. You've seen Canadians complain.
If I develop a feature for company A, then reuse it for company B, isn't A footing the bill for B? I mean, we all do that, but I think it's worth thinking about.
The more features the language has, the harder it is to read.
And using @ for positional arguments when it’s already used for instance variables is a questionable choice. But on the other hand, the syntax for these blocks has always been clunky.
But Ruby is all about options. You can do things the way you want, when you want. That’s the happiness you achieve. But it does become more difficult to read for newcomers and devs not up on the latest updates, which is a major sacrifice.
Some of these new features are blessings though. The safe navigation operator saves lots of checks and I wish I had it in JavaScript and other languages (rather than checking for a property first).
He doesn't "work for" the FCC, he's a commissioner [1], which is a political position for which he was nominated. The role is inherently political and he's there to provide leadership. He's a Democrat, if anything this means he's more likely to find a higher role in the future.
It seems they also discontinue products that make them money and continue products that lose them money. Their exchanges with the SEC [1] seem to suggest that YouTube loses money (otherwise why wouldn't they publish the numbers?), and if that becomes known public info, it may open them up to a host of legal and political problems.
Regardless, if you discontinue products your customers are using, don't be surprised if your customers stop relying on your products.
1. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/28/sec_google_youtube/
A: I'd like to hire some people to improve our processes. It will take time and money and prevent future problems, but you will never notice.
B: Time and money and no new features? No way, I won't approve that.
A: tries to sell it some more even though they are technical and not a salesperson
B: No.