A connected rabbit hole is image decoding of lossy format such as jpeg: from my experience depending on the library used (opencv vs tensorflow vs pillow) you get rgb values that varies between 1-2% of each others with default decoders.
598 karma · joined February 8, 2021
With copyright, you are allowed to use the original work as your own if you transform it enough (basically, you can get inspiration from it, but not exact copy).
With patents, you infringe a patent when you use the work described in it without the license, even if it's just as an inspiration and if you transform the method. It also doesn't matter if you rediscovered the content of the patent independently from the inventor, even if you can prove it.
So in this case, the original manufacturing company can defend its IP even if its work has been learned then rediscovered by an AI.
This is the sin no 5 of the article: "5. Not Exploiting Structure in the Matrix"
> Amazon recommends that purchasers also buy Tagamet to avoid vomiting up the poison, a personal use scale to measure the proper quantity, and the Amazon Edition of the Peaceful Pill Handbook, a suicide manual with an entire chapter on how to die by SN.
That's definitely a suicide kit.
$(exit 5) ./show_error.sh
outputs 0.
Sourcing the file is the same as copying and pasting its content into the current shell. It is designed to allow this kind of things (accessing the caller execution context). But it is not what we usually call a script precisely because of this.
My guess would be the dock from MacOS (or the one from unity) instead of a scroll bar: its too large for a scroll bar, and clicks are grouped in chucks which could be centered on applications icons.
So this identify the OS to be either Linux+Unity (ubuntu ?) or MacOS.
By looking at the groups of clicks on that docks, we can see that three applications have been opened 8-10 times each.
If you think a bit about it, it would have been much more natural to write number in the opposite order compared to what we have now, since we read and manipulate numbers from least-significant digit to most-significant digit and read text left-to-right.
When you read a number like 346624596, you need to parse it twice to know its value, but also to know its magnitude or do anything significant with it. In the opposite order, everything becomes simpler: adding two numbers, knowing the magnitude or ignoring the least-significant digits ("its about 350 millions"), ...
That's why you have things like memory order constraints on atomic operations in C, and why you need to be extremely careful with how you place things like memory fences when doing anything fine-grained between several threads.
I'm pretty sure it was posted on hw, but I can't find the link anymore.
Sure, you might encounter a black swan event which force you out of retirement only 3 years after you started, and at that point your security margin won't have increased your stash by much, but at the same time your skill won't have deteriorated much in 3 years.
It also work even if the black swan even happens 20 years after your retirement. You just need to take a security margin your are comfortable with, and project how much you will have after 3, 10, 25 years to see how much you have for unforeseen events.
Yes I completely agree with you, and if you don't need it, any unicode handling library is overkill and add more headaches than simply handling utf-8 string as byte arrays.
I just wanted to insist on the fact that some people will have to deals with theses kind of issues. And these issues are self inflicted, but it gets worse every time someone try to reinvent the wheel or rely on byte array when they shouldn't.
Having a standard library in the language make the issue less worse: the core of the language still handle only byte arrays, and for the cases where it's not enough you still have only one library so you don't add your own subtly different mishandling of the standard by implementing your own.
So memcpy is fine, but that's about it: for example, please don't use strcmp when you need to sort data alphabetically and please don't try to reimplement the standard algorithms designed for that, otherwise you will be part of the problem.
When you send your unicode string to an external system (for example a storage server with a database) and latter retrieve the string, only to find out that it has been normalized differently so it no longer match byte-for-byte what is stored in your program, and all of a sudden strcmp no longer works.
Or all kind of weirdness like that because every system outside of your program will handle unicode differently, and you will need to adapt to them, and having a string library to do most of the heavy-lifting will avoid the need for every user to rewrite a library from scratch.
Not to mention that for every developer which rewrite unicode handling functions, you will probably end up with a function with subtly different behaviors from others, which aggravate the problem for others when they will try to communicate with your system.
A few years ago, the neighbor kid from where my parents live made a hole in a wall of his room leading to outside.
> If you mean "open to accredited investors" well, I'm ok with that.
How dare you. Drug lords and ransomware writers have as much rights to buy the US constitution as everybody else. It's their hard-earned money, they should be able to use it however they want. /s
But all my knowledge about that comes from a small drama some times ago when a debian maintainer wanted to remove "which" from its current package (see https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/874049/bf89a969ed3dde87/).
I use signal to chat with my cousin who is in another continent, and he is online only when within reach of public wifi when he's outside, which is at night for me. My phone is always connected to 4G, so maybe what you propose could work in this specific case, but in other cases it could be an issue.
With a wording like that and a percentage that high, I imagine it went down more or less like that: an adult explain to the kids in 5min what this does and how it will be better for everyone. Then ask kids to raise their hands if they are against it. And voila: 97% of the kids agree.
There are cases where fixed-point is preferred over floating-point, such as implementing an iDFT (or in general in algorithms when the dynamic of the numbers you manipulate is fixed and you need very precise control over the rounding errors).
But the article state: "Problem: I want to do arithmetic with fractional resolution but I can't afford the CPU cycles to use floating point." which isn't true for modern hardware. The rest of the article is still very interesting, but this is just a bad start.