As Linus expects others to write proper code, I expect people to conduct proper communication.
While I agree completely with what you say, Linus may be more important that you are and therefore his expectations may be more important than yours as well (in internet-slang: may be given more fucks about than yours).
Mozart. McEnroe. Maria Callas... Their game, their terms.
The idea that you could react faster or make a better critical decision than the computer is sort of funny actually.
Your reaction to this article is also sort funny. The situation you describe, with the computer making faster and better decisions, is what you expect to happen. A desirable output. And most of the time this is what WILL happen.
However, in liability issues we are not interested in the desired result. We are interested in failures. When things go wrong in whatever imaginable or unimaginable way. As this Volvo CTO seems to be more aware of than you, this WILL happen some day. That will most likely be the same day that the GP's prediction comes true, and Volco announces it doesn't count as a flaw in their system.
Cannabis don't have to be smoked, it can be eaten. Peoples with psychiatric problem are more prone to substance abuse. The 1950 have called and they want their debunked argument back.
As much as I would like it to be different, the GP's claim is not unreasonable.
From the npr.org:
'There have been nine studies following hundreds to thousands of people for decades looking for a connection between marijuana use and psychosis. All but one of these studies suggest that marijuana use is associated with schizophrenia. Sir Robin Murray, a psychiatrist at King's College in London, says that evidence changed his mind about weed. "Even I, 20 years ago, used to tell patients that cannabis is safe. It's only after you see all the patients that go psychotic that you realize – it's not so safe."'
I'm really tired of both this
and this never-ending "equality" BS. There could, almost be definition, be no other place than open source more inviting for people to enter. If they don't, it means they don't want to, and people are seeing problems where there aren't any
A LOT of energy could be diverted to other REAL issues, including misogynistic issues like: helping victims of domestic violence, changing popular (rap) culture that objectifies girls as disposable sluts, idolatry of the beauty ideal etc.
"why would someone pay when Google News is free?"
Why indeed, when
Admiral Nimitz was once asked why he kept a picture of MacArthur in his office given that they never got along together
Somewhat besides the point, but writer Henrik Ibsen also had a portrait of his arch enemy, August Strindberg in his working room, to "show him [Strindberg] how well he was writing".
He is being threatened with being charged with making a hoax bomb after they clearly knew it wasn't a bomb (given the proposed charge).
Is wasn't even a hoax bomb. The student never even intended to pretend it was a bomb.
The story can be summarized as: folks imagine something done by a guy whose skin colour they don't like, and arrest him on the grounds of their assumptions instead of facts.
I don't understand the big push to get everyone to code -- not everyone *wants* to code, nor should they have to.
It is just a
Coke and Mentos rockets are also cool nerd stuff, but those headlines have become very scarce.
"She believes that they reinforce traditional stereotypes of women"
Sounds more like "women will lose the powerful tool of sex deprivation to control men".
Not that anyone here will suffer from that a lot.
I dare you to try to identify another culture in the history of humanity that actually openly celebrates the murder of innocent civilians like way too many Muslims did on 9/11.
More specifically: some muslims openly celebrated the murder of innocent civilians and were caught on camera. Some extremist christians do similar things. Some extremist jews do similar things. Some Russians do similar things. Muslims don't have a monopoly on mediaval behaviour.
I've often wanted something that could produce an image from EM emissions, in the same way that our eyes create an image from light. One way to do so is to capture the electromagnetic field in an matrix in an area (say 2x2m^2), called an aperture, and converting these captured signals to visualise the sources of the signals, more or less like a scanning beamformer. In practice it would be costly to capture hundreds of signals at once. Assuming the sources are stationary, you can also scan the aperture horizontally and vertically.
The display update rate is awful, useless for video and marginal for scrolling. Also it consumes the SPI port which is usually why one gets a raspberry pi in the first place.
All of that may be true, but doesn't change anything to my original statement that the Foundation's was not the first and not the most customised display board. There are other uses for a rpi than the SPI interface, and for many of those -controlling stuff, playing music, whatever!- no high refresh rate is needed, and a compact display is very useful.
Why won't sharks eat lawyers? Professional courtesy.