1,587 karma · joined December 1, 2009
Reachable at jrslepak@gmail.com
I've seen plenty of comments from people in rural areas along the lines of "Why are all the young folks moving to the big cities instead of here?"
This is likely to have some confounding factors, considering the usual mechanics of skipping a university course.
We also have a multiplicity of building materials, tools, fabrication processes, etc. What's the standard way to make a steel object? Do you cast, forge, stamp, mill, sinter, roll, weld? I would expect engineering as a discipline to have more solid arguments for choosing which (combination) of those processes to use for a particular task than what is typically thrown around in discussions about choosing a programming language or paradigm.
Remote: if necessary
Willing to relocate: yes
Technologies: Racket, OCaml, C, Java, J, APL, ACL2, LLVM, Haskell
Web: https://jrslepak.github.io
Email: jrslepak@ccs.neu.edu
I'm nearing the end of my PhD in programming language design, with a focus on high-level languages for data-parallel computing. My overall interest is in designing/building tools for data science, scientific programming, machine learning, and similar fields.
We already have an answer about a government-operated communication medium: the government (including those acting on its behalf) must uphold our rights. That implies an obligation to keep storing/hosting/delivering things we say. It costs money, but society is more or less ok with the idea of a government having a legal obligation to spend resources on something. But what do we do with a private entity which spends a lot of money to operate and maintain a communication medium?
I've seen a few printed as having subtitles, including one with both a colon and a subtitle.
http://brrian.org/papers/ecoop2011-javascript-eval.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.03832.pdf
https://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/Published/pmmwp...
I'm not sure this is even true in theory. The decision to cite something looks to me to be more about relevance than quality. Citing a paper says, "they investigated a related question," rather than "their investigation was especially rigorous/thorough."
Encouraging journals to publish more "boring" research, and if need be, dedicated journals, can have an actual impact.
Only if tenure committees and funding agencies consider the "boring" research sufficiently important.
Because relatively few bars have anything interesting to drink that's non-alcoholic.
Then they came for Google+, and I did not speak out—Because almost all the people I want life updates from are on Facebook.
Then they came for Google Reader, and I did not speak out—Because I never actually heard of Reader until years after it was eliminated. Maybe Reader was actually first?
Then they came for Works with Nest, and I smugly said, "I told you so"—Because I always thought it was a bad idea to expose my thermostat to the internet.
Finally, they game for GMail—and I couldn't contact anyone who might speak out for me.