I think `set autoindent` works across most versions of vi. It's not language aware. It just indents the next line to the same place as the previous. For me, that was enough.
Efficiency is a problem in it's own right. It drives down cost. Which means that surveillance will be used more often and for less important reasons. It's not uncommon for people to need to skirt the law from time to time. This is particularly true of people in the lower classes of society. Is it fair to ding a retail worker whose car registration just expired but needs a few days to get it all straightened out? That's something modern surveillance could easily handle nearly perfectly.
Assuming it worked well enough, you could use it to run legacy Java applets without having the Java plugin installed. That would at least improve the security situation a bit while still allowing for legacy applets.
Art certainly has a place here. The purpose of this are isn't to look cool. The purpose of art is express and/or provoke a reaction. In this case, it's a reminder that these people exist and are suffering due to war. Most of us know war is horrible, but we don't know it the same way someone who has experienced it has. Part of the reason these pictures exist is to give us a glimpse of that understanding. And maybe if we're lucky next time around, people won't choose war.
On one hand, I get editor wars. On the other, it's rather silly. In order to evolve, editors require a certain amount of mind share for their plugins ecosystem. That said once you have a Turing complete language to extend the editor, they're all basically the same in terms of capability.
The paper is dated 94 which is the same year as the original implementation as the C++ STL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Template_Library#Impl...). So it's a fair bet they didn't have access to that. I would think the entire difficulty of the exercise would change with that.
Playing against a bot programmed to fight intelligently and efficiently just wouldn't be fun for long. A friend and I tried playing against the Reaper bot in Quake years ago. It mopped the floor with us. Which in terms of my skill probably doesn't mean much but my friend was really good at Quake. The bot didn't let up, didn't pause, memorized weapon locations, move at a constant run, and never missed. It would even jump, 180, and beam you with a rocket. That made for fun novelty one evening but no one wants that for multiple levels.
I think there needs to be a grain of salt with the billion dollar mistake thing. The really dangerous part isn't dereferencing the null so much as what happens afterwards. If you dereference a null and the program terminates, that sucks. But, you debug it and life moves on. If "something" happens that's a whole different much bigger issue. Rust doesn't have null but you can ".unwrap()" an option type. Which may terminate the program and force you to debug. If memory serves, Haskell doesn't enforce exhaustive patterns. So once again, the program terminates and you're stuck debugging. That's really just life.
Now, I do in general prefer languages "without" null as they generally have more warning about when you can actually encounter null. Though my personal experience says that in sensibly written programs dealing with null isn't that big a deal. Is it a billion dollar mistake? I would have little trouble believing that. However, that would likely make dynamic typing an order of magnitude or two larger in the mistake dept.
Looking at the crane though. Approving it as a mobile crane seems a bit on the bonkers side. Mobile cranes are self contained units and provide their own stability through mass. This bolts to the building. Which, if memory serves, was where building cranes were failing a few years back.
As someone who would "need" this only once or twice every few years at best. I vastly prefer the idea of using this. I will likely never care about nitty gritty typesetting details. Getting things to "remotely legible" is more than enough for me.
That's really 2 questions in one. The first is "is there demand for another shift?". The second being "does the capability exist?". My inclination is to say the answers to those 2 are "yes" and "maybe" respectively.
Smart phones are awesome but by their very nature they have some limitations. The slowest aspect on any computer is communication from the user to the machine. We're slow and the constrained real estate of phones only makes it worse. I wouldn't consider typing all this on a phone. The next slowest is the other direction. So if you can figure out how to improve those channels in a highly portable way people will most likely buy it.
That brings us to the capability question. Voice kinda improves things when you can't use your hands but it's always been unreliable. Physical keyboards on phones are out of fashion. Smart watches are tiny and power constrained. Google glass looked neat but is expensive and again power constrained. It seems to be a serious question of how do you get a bigger device without the drawbacks of getting a bigger device.
More importantly if the population of earth is facing critical systems collapse, what are the odds of the next critical resupply mission the Mars colony actually launching. It's not like a martian colony would be self sufficient anytime soon.
"Slavery". That sort of system requires a fair amount of legal and propaganda support. Our election system gives the old slave states a boost. And our more bigoted politicians are constantly rehashing and reusing the propaganda to justify their actions. So while slavery itself is gone, the weighted legal system and propaganda are still in place doing what they do. It's a safe bet that much of the Flint water crisis is due to the water system being for "those people".
That depends on whether it's priority is to be a clock or a piece of art first. As an artwork, it more than succeeds. In it's current form, prioritizing art seems the correct choice. It takes up a fair chunk of screen real estate. It's the kind of thing you pop up for a bit and look at as a novelty. To be primarily a clock, it will need a more dedicated display. Even if that's just an LCD monitor connected to a Raspberry PI.
In my experience, the exponential time thing isn't really a big deal. I've used Perl regular expressions on a very regular basis for about 16 years now. Exponential time has been an issue only once. Obviously if I were accepting regular expressions from random people, I'd use RE2. But for my day to day purposes, it's pretty much a complete non issue.
I agree that we need to solve climate change. It's the single most important issue facing humanity at the moment. Where I don't agree though is the general idea that it's mutually exclusive with space exploration. A common theme is that space research often pays of in advancements down here.
If we actually have a stable outpost on the moon or Mars. We'll likely advance the state of solar systems and energy storage. We'll also likely need research into maintaining a stable biome on said station. And then there is the next generation of scientists that will be inspired. So in a roundabout way, space exploration could help save our butts down here.
To be fair, I meant it in both contexts at the same time. A more polite term might be "opinionatedly retro". Go's conservative bend is both a positive and negative.
Go isn't a research project. It's more a manifesto on programming philosophy born of "old man rage" in language form. This works out mostly because the old men in question happen to include Rob Pike and Ken Thompson. However, that results in a very specific feel and set of tradeoffs in Go.
I don't program in C but I use the ternary operator quite regularly. It's quite handy when you're populating large data structures. For limited use in that case I don't find the readability that diminished maybe even enhanced.
Not really though. If it's important, you have the option to do a dive and read up on something. At least for me, it's not about not paying attention. It's about not being force fed. The world can be an awful place especially when viewed through the lens of sensationalism. It's just not healthy for my household to be constantly connected to that. So what I do is try to pay attention on a meta level and only delve for details on my term. It requires intellectual honesty but in the end is healthier and more informative.
The problem is that while potentially more immersive, VR is more exclusionary. By definition it's not an experience that shares well with meatspace. So it's easy to cut off and be cut off from other people in the same room. That's fine for a teenager in their room but not so much someone living with a significant other or children.
They're not really mutually exclusive problems though. Especially homelessness where the issue isn't technical so much as will. Other issues like say global warming may dovetail rather well with settling Mars. Our rovers run on solar power and RTGs. Which is fine for something small. But to even think of safely living on Mars. We're going to need to figure out how to run power intensive equipment like bulldozers and excavators. That means we'll need to deal with some of the more thorny issues related to energy and global warming.
There's more to it than that though. Christianity for example exists in multiple aspect in people's lives. The aspect you're talking about is the actual belief. But there are other aspects. There is a set of traditions and ceremonies that people perform. There are the local communities. There is a set of values. Then there are the overarching organizations. And at the same time, there is a set of mental tools for reasoning about things that while they look like belief may not be. All of these fit into a ball of mud that can be called religion.
Physical security doesn't have the same parameters as digital security though. The pool of attackers on the internet is much larger and more sophisticated than those looking to break into the average person's home.
To put it in more concrete terms. The door to my home has 2 deadbolt locks. I would be highly surprised to learn that either can't be picked in a short period of time by someone with enough skill. That said the probability of that happening to my door is relatively low. The same level of exploitability in a web browser though is much more likely to be a problem.
In short the pools of likely attackers for my home is quite different from the pool of attackers for my digital presence. The primary concern I have with IoT is it's potential to expand the pool of attackers for my home.
I think there are 3 fundamental issues that are coming together. The first is a discounting of the fact that programming and using Excel are in their own way doing higher level math. You're not doing the lower level grunt work but combining those techniques to do something greater. The second being that many problems aren't about mathematical truth so much as mop and bucket work. Designing your process for off hours communication isn't going to simplify into an elegant equation. However being really good at that sort of thing is important. The final thing is most people are lousy at recounting what they did/do. So it maybe that a significant number of people do use advanced math < 1% of the time but don't actually remember it.
The problem is that these people are going to be living out their entire lives on the ship. While you can maintain genetic viability by supplementing from frozen stock. Maintaining a viable culture and a society that the caretakers will actually want to live in is another thing. Forcing anyone to live a culturally and socially impoverished life is cruel.
I would suspect you would want to have at least 10-20 people in each 5 year age bracket. Then people will have a fighting chance at developing their own social lives and maybe even their own culture.