If glibc maintainers choose to make their own repository which Stallman has has no right demand anything they are free to do so. And then it becomes distributors freedom to choose who's repository they prefer.
93 karma · joined November 13, 2013
If glibc maintainers choose to make their own repository which Stallman has has no right demand anything they are free to do so. And then it becomes distributors freedom to choose who's repository they prefer.
Of course it might be that I have missed it or it is hidden somewhere. I hope it really exists somewhere in the repository, but I didn't find it. I might be too tired to find it and someone else has better luck.
A) In system price there are many components and that makes ultra cheap CPU:s in other vice identical configurations not so good price-performance.
B) Performance is really the performance differential from what you upgrade. And even more importantly the performance differential years from now to systems of that time, if you upgrade to a system that lasts 5 years before you upgrade or to a system that lasts 7 years before you upgrade is significant in terms of price/performance because later means you get the high performance early and price last longer.
C) Significantly higher single threaded performance compared to Ryzen 7 the main contender. There are still many tasks that are single threaded, especially if you run legacy code.
D) AVX-512 I doubt the review benchmarks are in AVX-512 but some legacy code. AVX-512 increases both width of vector and fraction of code and algorithms that can be parallerized significantly. Once compilers are well tuned to use AVX-512 the code compiled with AVX-512 optimizations turned on should be significantly faster than what it was before hand. Simply being able to do 8-16 times work per cycle in large variety of tasks is significant advantage even if that is for a good fraction of time instead of all the time.
Personally I7-920 has given me far better price-performance compared to people who bought dual core at the time simply because it has lasted LONGER so it had superior price/(time between CPU upgrades) measurement. Right now in that same measurement I7-7820X is the king.
So in conclusion I7-7820X is faster in both real legacy code and the future code, and gives good enough performance longer simply because code that you run when you would start considering upgrades run much faster on it simply because of extensions.
Lots of keys combined with Meta(alt)+Control key, the optimum keybinding for window manager, those two keys are always unused in user programs. Its really perfect for emacs, no-one has imagined to use those two keys with some random key, on any of emacs packages or modes.
Poor me have binded my windowmanager commands with Super(windows) + (what ever command key I use for it.
It can give you ideas on how to delegate more.
Secondly figure out how to retain developers. If it causes you stress and hiring is real expense then you should invest in fixing it. Make developer work environment as good as possible and maybe pay slightly above market pay.Your job is to fix the environment to reduce turn over to compensate the boring product with other factors they value.
There are real differences there between sexes, and those preferences affect what career is the best for you. You don't pick whats average for you, you pick your best career with all things considered, and small differences in preferences can skew the outcomes heavily. Also I like to point out there is bunch of careers where there is heavy shortage of MEN choosing it for same reasons.
Write everything down about your idea in a paper. Then store it somewhere safe. Let it go for a while, and concentrate on law school first year. Check if you can bring second year courses, to your first year. Check if you can study in the next summer also. Then if you can graduate in 17-22 months do it. If you can't do that, but can move workload from later years to first year then do that and be able to work on your idea in later years of your school more freely. Design your law school experience to get back to your idea in either 17-22 months from now as graduated lawyer, or 10-22 months from now part time because you have more free time in your school scheduler. This way your idea is motivator for you to work harder in your law school, instead of distraction. Your goal is to get as soon as possible able to work on your idea full time or with serious amount of time instead of splitting your attention between two.
Its unlikely to have ANY deal between EU and Britain, there are too many conflicting interests. So the end result is that all the EU deals just end and there is no replacement deal for them. Problem is when lots of countries want to leave their own mark on the deal and lot of people in the deal making process has vested interest in making bad deal for britain and Britain really cannot approve such deals.
Also cost increases are stuff that look good in marketing material to increase desirability of that college over other colleges and that trend will hit a wall. Also there is increasing political movement to get college tuition costs down.
What I get from this is: Either USA is totally screwed up country or you two value your personal lifestyle a lot more than having a child. Child isn't really that expensive since even poor can afford it. Its expensive to have child with expensive lifestyle.
Yes. I know some libraries add "reflection" but its not good enough. It needs to be baked in language and not require additional syntax on classes to be used as data for your own reflective code.
Here's why, either Russia or China could launch a first strike if they believed USA wouldn't retaliate. Or simpler they would use conventional means more aggressively and if that escalated to conflict with USA then they would simply make first strike. Key point is neither country should ever think USA would definitely NOT use nuclear retaliation on nuclear first strike. In a sense by making a major nuclear weapons power less likely to do use its own weapons increase overall chance of nuclear war. And finally this system also gives additional urgency for aggressive actions for opposing great powers, by forcing them to act and finish all their aggressive plans during term of a president they perceive in capable of ultimate action.
~1000€ is what ultra leftwing party's youth group proposes. ~600€ is what the Green leftist party proposes
The right wing parties talks about creating motivation for people to get to work with the basic income. A newspaper supporting prime minister party's talk about either partial basic income of 550€ with it replacing most benefits or full basic income of 800€ with absolute cutting of other benefits.
What I'd like to see most is basic income combined with true flat tax. No tax deductions, minimal bureaucracy. If we are going to pay certain minimal support to everyone to keep them from going too desperate, we could as well pay it to everyone and then start taxing from first euro earned with the flat percentage.
Instead of current system in which people send lots of separate applications for different benefits and then people paid by government has to work. And when you get raise you probably need to get new tax form from tax office to give your employer.
What well made basic income should give is instead of having long plateau after the minimum everyone is guaranteed to get one way or other, is a way for everyone to get that minimal guaranteed all the time and any marginal employment would increase income over that. And most of the cost would be got from reducing number of government employees required to handle it. Everyone doing the math should consider that only real cost of basic income is when someone earns less than (1/taxrate)*basic income and more than what government currently gives to poor. And it eliminates cost of MANY government jobs handling papers for benefits, and makes easier to take a job for a day or two or week or two because you cannot loose benefits for it. Or loose benefits for starting your own business.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechargeable_battery
So this alone would increase your cost estimates by 150$
And for society you probably want a weeks worth of electricity stored in some form or other to deal with weather differences, and not summer winter difference. So minimal goal would be 24*7. Or just more than 150 hours.
Or that another 1500$ of cost not included in your estimations. Now a big thing to realize, in electricity markets where networks are required to take in solar and wind from other players, its not the producer of electricity that bears the cost of that large storage its the utility that buys the electricity from market.
Right now it works somewhere along the lines. Lets make 40% efficient fossil fuel plants instead of 60% efficient slowly starting fossil fuel plants, so that we can turn them on and off for covering the difference between intermitted sources and consumption. So in reality renewable plants end up just becoming fuel saving devices for fossil fuel plants while reducing fuel efficiency of said plants when they actually are turned on . In long run I believe nuclear is way to go if we want to stop global warming. The intermittency problem goes away with it and you can run a grid with 100% nuclear with very little storage because production isn't intermittent, and with modern plants you can vary electricity production between 50 and 100%
Global warming is accumulating effect, the emissions are just rate of change, and not the temperature difference, and we need to aim pretty close to zero emissions to stop it. [Yes nature takes some of it off from circulation but a lot less than people think because naysayers compare our emissions to winter, summer cycle of plants that cancels itself in yearly basis.]
Correct way of getting huge percentages is saying it used to be X% More. You can get MORE huge percentages you can get LESS less than 100%.