onnoonno

Even more impressive are IMO the current songs people compose on the SID. This guy is an artist in the true sense:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELpnGDHo0Bg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI5d6Y0Fzl4

Yes that is 100% original C64, no extensions, no cartridges. The first time I heard these, I was absolutely blown away.

Another fun one:

a=[]

a.append(a)

If you behave lawful, you'll create one single tracking history for everything tied to your real life person. If you don't, you apparently can get away with stuff like that AND on top of that you won't create a single, coherent stream of data for big brother.

These are fucked up incentives.

Oh you are right. It actually _does_ have a time shift. I take back what I said and assert the opposite!

Thanks for the explanation.

I see, thanks. But that rather sounds like the buoy itself is switching modes?

From the look of all the plots, even the far-away ones, it rather looks to me like they have been remotely switched into event mode (with that 15s stuff being plotted at about the same time)?

I guess I am really confused about the time stamps.

The spike corresponds to about 15min delay between the quake at 9:31 UTC. But some kind of spike visible in all stations at that time, even very far away ones, like Mendocino bay.

Honestly, this looks to me rather like some bad data due to the buoys switching mode because of radio commanding 15min after the quake rather than any wave arriving. (Like the other poster suggested)

Even if the shock would travel through an Earth made out of steel, it wouldn't have reached Mendocino bay that fast.

EDIT: There is actually a time shift and it seems to be enough, as wiredfool pointed out. Thanks!

At least the time stamps in the plots seem to correspond to current time in GMT.

But that doesn't fit the data, either. The buoys all report something around the 9:45ish GMT mark. And 1500m/s would mean you reach Mendocino bay in California only about now or so. But have a look at the plot:

https://archive.fo/KsN8b

> My assumption, guess really, is that they were remotely activated into "Tsunami Mode" -- a more rapid-pulse reporting mode or similar, which just is a bit noisier perhaps?

That sounds like a very good guess. But then, the spikes that are purported to be the Tsunami in the media is just the ADC having a couple bad samples from being switched into a different mode or so :-)

If any USGS person is reading this thread here: Take it as a issue report that your page should be readable and understandable by lay persons, at least lay persons with a non-geophysics STEM background :D

What I don't get is that nearly all the buoys that have that moving icon "Tsunami alert" show some excitation at the ~9:45GMT mark.

But I would of course expect the buoys that are farther away to only show some kind of peak when the wave actually reaches them. And it looks like they are thousands of km away, so some of them should not even have been reached yet.

Some what is going on there? Is the data time actually shifted and not in GMT but 'earthquake propagation time'? Am I reading the plots wrong?

I have easily more than 100 firefox crashes for each kernel crash, and I guess that is similar for other people(?)

So I think the session restore is almost always used in a case where firefox crashed, but the system is fine.

I think versatility and the absolutely easy on-ramp are Python's killer app. The 'absolute noob' can start writing simple python code after 5min of introduction (you can start using it like BASIC), while the 'senior dev' can still write python after years and isn't turned off or overly constrained by the language. (Yes, of course, warts exists, no language is perfect)

And regarding Django being the killer app: There are other people for which numpy/scipy is Python's killer app, for example.

Are you sure? Bonnie++ has byte-wise and block-wise tests. Yes, the byte-wise tests are CPU bound (as expected), but I have not seen that for the block-wise tests on any machine so far?

Relevant: http://superuser.com/questions/957907/unable-to-install-font...

You have a calculation error:

707 x .32m ~= 230m

> The latter part is true, but BTC cannot provide that. It's nothing more than a nifty hack. It kind of works, which is impressive, but it is horrible inefficient and impossible to scale due to its inherent limitations. So far the only solutions that have been proposed were to tack on even more complexity. To make matters worse, all of these solutions have remained vapourware for quite some time.

It is not a given that Bitcoin cannot scale, even though a select few in the ecosystem repeat this as if it is a fundamental truth.

Bitcoin is proposed by many in the ecosystem to scale as it has been before: By scaling up transactions on the chain. See http://www.bitcoinclassic.com/

But you still have a lot less predictability:

- DRAM refresh

- cache hits/misses

Have you looked at QGit? Yes it is very old - but is also still works fine.

I do not know why this is downvoted. It is correct.

There is a very important context to the 'he called him a goat fucker': The - admittedly very crude - 'poem' he made is embedded in the context of basically explaining what the German law is about, and what you can not say.

There is also another part of history: Erdogan complained about another, earlier satire show on German TV. Boehmermann was referencing this and the earlier attempts of censorship by Erdogan, and basically said 'look, we could call you this, but we didn't, we just clearly expressed our opinions and this is our freedom of expression here in Germany'.

Thanks for the interesting read.

Well, but then that simply is a choice, isn't it?

I would not expect to be paid in full if I work part-time - why should that be true if I would be a woman?

FTA:

> But the argument that “life choices” made by women are the real reason behind the gap is, in itself, an absurd oversimplification. Sure, many women choose to stay home or cut back their hours after having children. But many others don’t opt out. They’re forced out because they cannot afford child care, or find a full-time job that affords them any kind of flexibility.

There is no reason to believe that lack of flexibility or not being able to afford day care wouldn't hit men in the same way, too.

The people who call it a myth show that the gap disappears as soon as you control for these variables. Actually, the gap disappears to a large degree by looking at actual hours worked instead of just the yearly salary of jobs with the same description.

In a way, message passing using the usual way, methods, means TWO messages are passed: The parameters and the return value.

I think that obscures the better parts of the OOP view quite a bit.

> Proof of work was invented in the late 90s by Adam Back. The consensus algorithm using proof of work and a blockchain is what Bitcoin brought to the world.

Wikipedia disagrees:

> The concept may have been first presented by Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor in a 1993 journal article.

Adam Back invented hash cash as one form of POW.

> So, a minor level of genetic engineering may be useful over the long term (100,000 years) if we want to avoid ever stronger dependence on medical assistance.

We don't know where 'Politicians are able to do 100ky policy planning' comes in the tech-tree, though :D

From the current state of affairs, it appears to be still far out in the future...

> It is even worse in Europe and Russia.

Maybe it is a question of a middle ground?

I see a slowly declining population as being positive for humanity.

I think 1e9 children having a materially secure future is much better than 1e11 children fighting wars for the last scraps of resources.

Also if those children are not mine.

Ah, thanks. I am still a bit lost though: What are they going to brute-force then, if there's no such security enclave?

Wait a bit... So you say that they actually store the keys on the external NAND instead of the supposed-to-be-very-secure crypto parts of the CPU?

They apparently have secure memory to store the PIN. It sounds unlikely that they have not enough secure memory to store the quite small key as well.

So that would be an odd design decision. Do you know for sure that is how it is implemented?

... for narrow definitions of 'quantifiable value'.

Yes, it looks like the real problems occur (as also mentioned in his post) whenever encountering self-modifying code.

I wonder whether it would be possible to detect and then either pattern match or manually resolve those cases of self-modifying code, in case they are few and contained to a small section of code each?