ohf

> Yep. I bet this changes relatively soon, since you can sometimes use recursion in OpenCL & CUDA.

Am I correct in assuming you can only recurse when the recursion can be "unrolled" into a simple loop? In other words, no program flow structures.

Neanderthal isn't a synonym for stone-age.

Oh, duh.

Still, javascript.

High CPU overhead seems reasonable for HTML5-based games. Introducing a DOM can only make things slower relative to a leaner (native) engine.

For reference, I'm on a late-2015 laptop (XPS 13 9350) with integrated graphics, but the newer i3 gives me perfectly fine performance.

Wow, that webpage sucks. What are the specs?

Touche.

> Java calls references, works more like C/C++ pointer, rather than C++ reference

What makes you say this? You can't do pointer arithmetic on Java references, and the internal memory model is completely obscured. C++ and Java references look similar to and are accessed like variables. The major difference is that Java references can be reassigned, like a pointer, which is necessary in a language without true pointers.

Java references are closer to C++ references than anything else. They're like pointers until you access/call them, at which point they're just objects. C++ references are identical, but the syntax is a bit more explicit.

It is a funny language feature to have when you think about it; it just so happens to be useful. References and pointers are distinct in languages that have both (C++), so not mixing the terms between languages is helpful. If Java programmers started referring to their variables as "pointers," because internally, that's more representative of what they are, I'd be a bit irked.

I would actively avoid that, but only because it confuses me.

That syntax loosely implies that removing the second d assignment would allow me to create new-but-altered dogs with alterDog(Dog), which isn't the case. If I wanted to use assignments like that, I would try to go fully immutable with factory methods that help me make slightly different, new dogs on the fly, and return them.

Here lies the tale of Marissa Mayer.

That article sure manages to say a lot without saying anything at all.

It's whoever 4chan is.

Ah, shit.

I'd wager that Spotify is nearing the point at which - if not already there - record labels cannot afford to revoke their license. If they can get away with it, they'll try to push some buttons, but I doubt a full confrontation.

If there's any evidence against this, please let me know. I think it's interesting.

Why, no government-funded institutions have ever violated our privacy. What a wonderful idea.

Propaganda, trite.

Clearly, SAM is a shitty robot. It looks as if it were designed by someone who had no intention of using it to lay bricks.

Why serious breaches of trust such as this don't immediately receive outside, completely foreign, third party (all of it!) investigation is beyond me. None of this should be news - it should be implied. For the same reasons PDs shouldn't "investigate" their own abuses.

Considering most search queries are simple and apolitical, I feel the argument "tailoring search results is less dangerous than curating a news feed" has some merit.

That aside, if you use Google as your main news outlet, all that goes out the window.

5-6 years of living expenses.

Probably because it isn't the core conversation. What matters is that Microsoft is pushing bug bounties, not how big they are.

But it's really splitting hairs. I don't really get it either - just a guess.

Almost all "ex-gifted" students will tell you this. People who accomplish a lot while trying very little are an anomaly.

> It would really help a lot of people if we could segregate children as they enter the school system into more refined groups based on their needs rather than waiting for someone to select you for gifted programs like we do now.

This makes me distinctively uncomfortable.

Also, you've made the conclusion that relative intelligence, if even very accurate, implies specific, categorical needs. I'm very confused by this.

> Could one run a VPN through a blockchain?

You can encode any information you want on a blockchain, and it can be anonymous and specific to the user.

But it would be ///painfully/// slow.

Does anyone else get a fancy pants adventure vibe from this?

There's a critique about digital art in general here: over-perfection is dull. I'm all about that wabi-sabi.

Yet, "looking for qualified female developers" sounds patronizing at best, and brusque at worst.

We need more girls in the field by cultivating different career ambitions.

FWIW, I'm pretty sure the market segment of tunnelbear users were people dodging network restrictions, not people who valued privacy much.

That aside, there are exceptions and someone is getting fucked over.

Viruses are more like robots. They don't respond to stimuli. They just, do.

The definition of "life" comes down to splitting hairs. We don't consider something "alive" if its behavior doesn't change when its environment does.

Digital watches were pretty cool when they were new, too.

In 10 years, smart watches will be bougie. Something about analog-everything has more staying power.

Try restructuring your body as a corporation.

The way the system is set up now, there would be little incentive to make pharmaceuticals without patents. The R&D cost is insane, so to be profitable, pharmaceutical companies need exclusive rights to their drugs.

Bearing that in mind, I have no reason to believe a fully state-funded pharmaceutical system would be impossible, tied into healthcare. However, to make people complacent with that, it would have to be unbelievably transparent. Many people fear the idea of the state designing and providing them with drugs.