white-flame

If their stereo equipment is so high end, then why are their input power electronics so crappy at producing clean voltages? Filtering and isolating against common noisy power lines seems a pretty obvious design consideration.

I love throwing that point at situations like this.

That is absolutely NOT "electromagnetic interference", in terms of radiative electromagnetic noise. It's a wiring fault.

Also massive parking structures. It's the interface between car-places and walking-places, necessary for the otherwise car-centric norm outside.

> University is not structured to give you the time to go deep or be curious - you're busy doing assignments, readings and studying for tests.

That statement, while true, should anguish the heart of anybody in any way related to or concerned for academia.

That would be the route of framing themselves as a common carrier, as opposed to the current model of a content-promoting, editorializing publisher.

It's not really about FLOPS. These sorts of many core, low performance per core systems do well in handling lots of I/O where there isn't all that much processing involved per node, and/or micro-latency isn't much of an issue, but lots can operate in parallel.

For actual FLOPS/kW where the FLOPS matter, you still can't beat GPUs, or for non GPU-able code high-wattage high-performance CPUs that can chew through data like nobody's business. These low power systems' FLOPS take more kW in aggregate to perform the same work in similar ballpark times. But when things are I/O bound, the low power cores should be able to handle messages & transactions with much less wattage overhead than what the high single-thread performance CPUs have to spool up.

They have nothing better to do. I mean that seriously.

We're generally safe, but all the security organizations need to do something to justify themselves, and have ways of thinking that always pursues "greater security" as a direction even if it overshoots what is reasonable for free people.

When security begins to impede freedom, the mandate of security must be placed below the mandate for freedom. Security is there to protect freedom as its ideological basis, so this is an obvious prioritization.

> There is really no doubt that airport businesses saw their sales increase after the liquids rule went into effect.

Correlation is not causation. I could simply have been a time where the fear of flying grew staler than the need to fly/benefit of flying.

This is government-compelled labor, whose product is only of value to government, and which labors in direct opposition to the personal safety and well-being of the entire general population.

Australia, you fail at the very notion of free western civilization.

It's MIT licensed. Who cares about the rules on their repo when you can just fork it?

The native output resolution is the max vertical resolution of all currently displayed modes.

For instance, if you have an interlaced mode showing under a non-interlaced mode, then the entire screen displays at ~480i (to use modern terms) with the non-interlaced portion doubling its scanlines. But if the interlaced screen gets covered up, then it snaps to ~240p non-scandoubled.

The biggest modern problem with this is that displays turn themselves off to resync on mode changes, which always annoyed me greatly.

Or, it could be defined as the opposite:

An emulation presents a replica of something else's outward observable behavior.

A simulation runs a specific internal model, which generates some gestalt behavioral results.

An emulator might simply mimic surface-level behavior directly, or use an internal simulation in order to generate it from first principles.

There really isn't a hard and fast agreed-upon definition of these terms in software, but these seem in tune with their non-computing definitions.

Is this a port of the Flash version that was around years ago, or an original take?

Some of the news-splashy C64 games being released are actually just ports that don't fully disclose their prior existence, and that kind of rubs me the wrong way.

Correct. It's not a process-oriented environment, with crash protection facilities keeping everything at arm's length.

There are namespacing facilities (though I'm not sure how far back in history they go) to discriminate your code's reach, as well as to import the public API from others' code, or in a different manner to bore into their private affairs generally for admin/debugging/tracing/modification. "Global" variables have thread-local, dynamically scoped bindings which are super useful for configuration, redirection, or setting other side-band broad context when calling into shared code.

Also it should be noted that these types of machines (at least from the Symbolics point of view) tended to be single-user workstations, though were still networked to allow remote (and simultaneous) access to its running world, with varying levels of per-connection context.

One of the biggest downsides of ye olde Lisp machines was garbage collection times. Some had facilities to define dedicated heap regions, but generally the GC had to walk the entire workstation heap across all "applications" in 1980s hardware, which wasn't great. But at least as a programmer, you could freely code and only worry about minimizing GC pressure when it became an issue, instead of starting from a required malloc/free perspective and constantly worry about leaks.

First off, note that Lisp OSes were made before modern cybersecurity was a concept.

Since everything was Lisp all the way down, and Lisp is a very dynamic language, all calls that comprise the OS are available as plain function calls visible to the interactive REPL, introspection, and modification. They were very developer-oriented and had lots of ways to have live displays of objects, to reuse or interact with them, and very deep debugger and documentation integration, since all code was at the same "level".

Since it's a high level language that does not expose low level memory (although certainly there are obscure implementation-specific Lisp operations for doing so used deep in the guts), corruption of memory at a low crashy level isn't generally a thing. Protections between applications/processes aren't as necessary and it can all remain plain running threads & functions interacting with each other & the OS.

I searched the page for proxying and tunneling, neither of which is discussed. I'm sure switching to UDP will have dramatic consequences for these features.

There are people who simply walk away from it all. None of these issues are truly and specifically "to survive", it's all chasing something.

Specifically, I meant there's nothing to fall back on at the end if the gamble didn't pay off. Your family/friends are sick of you, you have nothing left to sell, any credit is trashed, and your venture didn't pan out.

Capital appreciation is certainly a large motivation for those who already own homes there, and those who are involved in local legislation tend to be mostly from that group.

In betting on opportunity, often times they have everything riding on it.

Where does the "harm" you talk about come from? Usually it's because there are other responsibilities you're engaged with. If you literally give everything else up to focus on one thing, these barbs aren't in your life. I'm talking forgoing rent to crash with family/friends, eating ramen, selling/getting rid of your things, live on credit cards, etc, and have a 24/7 focus that keeps you going.

You'd be surprised how much that frees you from the immediate "harm" you describe, but you also have nothing to fall back on, because you pretty much have nothing else anymore than your pursuit, and can be amassing enormous debt (financial and otherwise). It's a huge amortized, pushed-forward harm in the hopes that the gamble pays off. For many, it doesn't.

Then consider that many convicted felons also lose the right to vote.

Not "arts", but "Useful Arts" which are things like industry skills & practices, a specific term from the time of writing.

An easy example would be the Happy Birthday song.

edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_arts

The allowance for copyright law to exist in the USA is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"; with a similar intent to patents to eventually bring more quality things into the public domain. So yes, anything outside of that, regardless of invention of non-science/useful-arts, and regardless of profitability, is fair game.

Any other enforcements and punishments are overreaches by government on behalf of lobbying. Many agree that the scope and punishments on the books in the USA far outweigh the punished behavior, and these are being foisted upon the rest of the world in strong-armed multinational agreements, against the will of the people on the receiving ends.

I'll agree and expand on their benefits to more complex things:

The vast majority of languages are parsed into ASTs of some form, and Lisp is basically directly programming in AST data structures that are executable. Seeing that source code is basically just another data structure to be manipulated and converted was the major "Ah hah!" moment in demystifying compilers for me.

Forth is a great lower-level representation of nested expression evaluation, and sheds a lot of light on how to organize that evaluation in your code generation, converting foo(bar(baz(val),blort(val2))) into a linear stream of operations. Even for register machines, Forth's stack represents the intermediate values that must be retained between expressions in either registers or memory.

Once this basis of how programming languages work is established, then the ideas of new programming language design from the source code perspective can be explored in practical terms.

Anti-monopolist is pro-free market. Monopolies are kind of the opposite of markets.

"Free market" is about freedom to enter, participate in, and exit the market. So things like monopolies and artificial barriers to entry are anti-free market.

Net neutrality is policing specific legal vs illegal behaviors, similarly to environmental protection laws. A "free market" doesn't really (at least not publicly) allow illegal services, because the action itself is illegal, both inside and outside the market offerings, so it is relatively orthogonal.

Certainly the maximization of profit (which has little to do with free market operations, but more of lock-in) would be helped if they were freely allowed to pursue any illegal activity in the name of profit. But it is the realm of the government, not the market, to decide what should be illegal for everybody including market participants, to mitigate predatory actions and destructive externalities.

No, there are 3 sentences implied in the context, but only 1 sentence is visible in this specific example.

Natural language normally isn't a fully self-contained representation.

Obviously. I understand the accomplishments and applicability of the tech.

Stepping back a bit and simply looking at the context, though, it is an amusing contrast.

> OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company that aims to promote and develop _FRIENDLY AI_ in such a way as to benefit humanity as a whole.

I find it amusing & ironic that they're pursuing games of efficiently & strategically killing enemies as examples of their successful progress. ;-)

The only problem with excrement hitting the marine environment is if it accumulates on the shore or causes unpleasant odors to humans.

Remember that the ocean is a soup of all of its inhabitants' excretions and decaying corpses, and happily consumes stuff like that. Ocean life thrives around raw sewage pipe outlets.