slededit

DDR3 doesn't scramble the data bits, and I don't think DDR4 does either.

Here's an open source controller - you can see yourself: https://github.com/enjoy-digital/litedram

I work on tech to automate that. The generic answer is yes as long as you overcome the PCIe bottleneck (or can hide the latency).

He’s the exception that proved the rule. The FBI never repeated that hiring process on anyone else.

University students are legally adults and we’re considered so until recently. I don’t thin infantalizing young adults is healthy.

They would be $248 adjusted for inflation. But those tiny home computers came without a screen, hard disk, networking, a real OS, or pretty much anything we take for granted today. That $400 laptop packs in a ton of tech.

MSN messenger would have counted. We definitely joked about the CIA reading conversations. It also seemed like my more outlandish comments would get send error's more frequently than normal but perhaps that was just me being paranoid.

That UI fit with the whole experience of the Macintosh of the time. Notice the fuzziness - the low res CRTs were all fuzzy at the time the UI played into it. The crazy colours perfectly fit the branding of the machine it ran on. Note that there was no subpixel spacing in the era of CRTs.

The top menu bar is clearly too short to hold its contents but hey even Apple makes mistakes.

10.1 and even the late and great 10.6 were products of their time. The world has moved on, and Linux does not handle itself well in an era of 4K high DPI monitors.

I was wondering if I'd entered a time machine and returned to the early 2000s, and indeed the article is from 2012. My understanding is MyISAM has gotten much better - but if you care about perf over integrity there are even better options these days. "Eventually consistent" being the name of the game.

I'm not exactly used to answering these questions, but 5 seems the obvious choice here - the others being clearly unrelated. Is this really an example of the difficulty of this exam?

If my answer is wrong that would indeed be ironic... I'd love to be corrected.

A life tip: Always 50/50. Talent is great, politics helps you direct it to where it will maximize impact. If nobody thinks what your working on is important you may be an unrecognized genius, but its also perfectly possible you are on the wrong track.

If you can't convince anyone what your doing is important it should make you stop and reconsider your efforts.

The US uses customary measures. Imperial is the old UK system. It has some important differences like the size of a gallon - and perhaps most importantly if you like beer: the size of a pint.

You can’t advertise no new training if you update the training material.

This is actually more common on expensive gear. With that amount of capex spend I only want to pay for what I need.

Besides the lense is probably more expensive than this camera. It’s not really that expensive given the industry.

Doesn’t matter. It’s still rate limited.

Yea but nobody remembers those.

Today's weather affect's tomorrows. They are not independent variables.

Have you actually tried indexing on your own? Most websites whitelist the google crawler and backlist anyone else they detect. If you want to be nice and respect robots.txt a lot of those whitelist only Googlebot.

This isn't the 90s where anyone can crawl the web without countermeasures.

Counter intuitive, like the "put the armor where the bullet holes aren't" story about WWII bombers.

They are Unicorns but you know them when you see them. Cranking out code at high velocity that looks and feels right. When they don't know how to do something they actually research and look at the field. If no prior art exists at all (they frequently find themselves in this situation) they're already on their third iteration before anyone else has a prototype - even they can't get it perfect the very first time.

E.g. If they previously wrote compilers and you tasked them with graphics you'd see a book explaining affine transforms on their desk. Or parsing theory for the reverse transition.

A key part however is the ability to switch between fields. I've seen people I thought were 10x completely fail when tasked with something new.

I fail to see this as progress or the bright light at the end of the tunnel. Shielding oneself from uncomfortable ideas and writing people off wholesale has repeated time and again throughout history. It always ends in tyranny and oppression.

We found the tools to break this cycle in the enlightenment. This has led to the largest expansion of freedom and prosperity in world history.

Now I fear we are about to throw it all away. By your logic I should label you “toxic” for promoting this. But that fundamentally goes against these values I hold dear.

Which gets to the crux of the matter. Mere thinking and expression is sufficient for a label of toxicity with you. This goes against the fundamental values of liberalism and the enlightenment.

I fear we are regressing to a new dark age.

The common usage of the term “toxic person” these days is they post things on Facebook I disagree with. Not that they physically assault someone. Going straight to abuse is pure hyperbole.

Consider the origin of this thread - an idea was toxic not an action.

> Most people have encountered toxic personalities who they have needed to exclude from their life, for example.

I don’t think that is very common at all. There are people we get along with better but active exclusion is extremely rare. This modern trend of throwing away people we don’t like is very unhealthy and not what a community is about.

When you make a business decision - don’t pretend it was a technical one. That’s why it’s a bullshit excuse.

That’s obvious and also completely unrelated to what I was saying.

The optimizer can convert a library type to a builtin type if it still behaves as specified in the standard.

The compiler does this with other “library” functions like malloc and printf. There’s no reason a compiler couldn’t convert to a built in for this new type.

I could have used the raw statistics but it would have undermined the whole point. People don't make fully rational decisions - even when up/down voting.

But to get analytical, the argument is not that you buy everything that is advertised. The argument is that your purchases are primarily based upon how the purchase makes you feel. Even for everyday "necessities" like toilet paper which Japan gets away just fine without (they use bidet style toilets which are more effective at cleaning). In North America a bidet "feels" weird so nobody has one. When you get down to it toilet paper is not a logical purchase at all - better alternatives exist.

Further the argument is not that people don't have free will, quite the contrary. The argument is that the decision process is based upon considerations outside the efficacy of the product. Consumers don't do scientific studies on the products they buy, they only infer based upon heuristics which are primarily emotional in nature. This is why people consider bad tasting medecine to be more effective, and why Buckley's uses the slogan, "Tastes terrible, but works!".

On average, yes. Statistically speaking you do as well.

I always thought that was a bullshit excuse. They could have emulated it. Its not like 16-bit apps are on the bleeding edge of performance. Still nobody else is supporting 16-bit applications at all anymore so you have to give them credit.

The 50s was the golden age of advertising, and the basis for the show Mad Men. Its no coincidence this was around the time that it was discovered the product really wasn't important. It was more about how the person felt when buying and consuming that product.

In short the "better mousetrap" hasn't been thought true for the last 70 years. If you are going to actually make a better product you better make your customer feel smart for buying it - or you will fail.