Well given that this party is funded by taxpayers, for the purported benefit of said taxpayers and their society; I do think its problematic that said party would hold such a view.
2,633 karma · joined September 25, 2015
Because obviously people buying a few pills of ecstasy or a tab of LSD are a serious danger to society and should be taken of the streets. /s
It is indeed my opinion (as prefaced by 'I find myself disagreeing..') but the premise that a programming language benefits from resembling or mimicking features of natural languages is also an opinion.
Also I should note that your phrasing of the question isn't quite correct ("if it truly provided no benefit"), something that provides no benefit is unlikely to be excluded from a language (e.g. double negatives "there ain't nothing here to see!") unless there is a clear benefit to doing so, and in fact there are times that there is.
Particularly I would draw your attention to for example more limited lexicon sets (such as those used by dispatchers, rescue workers, climbers, EMT professionals etc.). Those explicitly exclude variation of expression, since that leads to an increased risk of being misinterpretation in often critical situations. It is my inclination that while interpretation of code isn't time critical, reducing variance (e.g. a common coding style does this as well) reduces cognitive load (makes comprehension more efficient).
> If a language is designed so that you can "learn as you go", then the expectation is that everyone is learning, and that's okay.
It's okay if we never reach understanding or agreement on what Faulkner intended by a particular sentence (we can still grasp most of the whole). For a programming language this is explicitly not okay! This goes for ambiguity as well.
> Multiple ways to say the same thing
> This one is more of an anthropological feature. People not only learn as they go, but come from different backgrounds, and will learn a different subset of the language first.
This increases cognative load with no particular benefit.
Umm what? Even assuming a limited set of ASCII i.e. Base64, on what magical medium do you suppose a 64^10 rainbow table is stored?
>> I thought web extensions couldn't block that content.
> I just ran a couple of tests, and I believe you are correct.
> Legacy uBlock Origin can block the network request to GA.
> However webext-hybrid uBO as per Network pane in dev tools does not block it. Same for pure webext Ghostery, the network request to GA was not blocked, again as per Network pane in dev tools.
> What is concerning is that both uBO webext-hybrid and Ghostery report the network request to GA as being blocked, while it is really not as per Network pane in dev tools. It's as if the order to block/redirect the network request was silently ignored by the webRequest API, and this causes webext-based blockers to incorrectly and misleadingly report to users what is really happening internally, GA was not really blocked on about:addons, but there is no way for the webext blockers to know this and report properly to users.
> This is what I have observed, hopefully this can be confirmed by others.
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.mcmansionhell.com/p...
[1] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AXKs99...
Firefox on mobile supports extensions, so you can use UBlock Origin / UMatrix. Also the built-in reader mode makes most sites a much better experience.
≫ 1/12 c
1 / (12 × c)
= 2.7797e-10 s/mhttp://www.businessinsider.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-of-mat...
> I didn't define useful either:
> but if you can understand written instructions it doesn't matter what you happened to read to get that skill.
Of course you are free to define useful in a way that makes it impossible to argue or to have a discussion. So let's stick to the way it is defined for the purpose of say University admission.
> Why is reading a classic American author important?
Reading difficult work earlier develops higher reading comprehension faster.
> Likewise, what is wrong with using M&Ms for learning math?
I think if by 4th grade you still need concrete pieces to understand integers or denominators of a fraction or whatever they were supposed to represent, that is a sign of a weak math education. In general concrete examples are antithetical to learning advanced math, this leads do the monkey-style ability to solve problems that are similar ones presented in textbooks, but not the ability to reason effectively about an unfamiliar problems.
This definitely needs a citation. It might not have significant correlation either way, but I cannot find a reference for the former (some cursory googling [0][1]).
[0] https://www1.udel.edu/johnmack/research/school_funding.pdf [1] https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa746....
I mean we didn't read a classic American author till 6th or 7th grade! And if I recall correctly there were still M&M's in math class in grade 4!
The US may have an education problem but somehow the Soviet Union and China did fine years ago with out all the ed-tech snake oil.
Would the qualified peer-review necessarily be reading the NodeJS code, or just checking the theoretical soundness of the paper? I'm not so certain about the former...
> It's a rhetorical trick at best
This is precisely it. It works because 'true' is defined for the formal system but not for the human. It so happens that the humans in question say well 'of course we know what Godel's proposition means and what true is' but that's just because they are familiar with those words in an entirely unrelated sense to the system being described (akin to say the common speech use of 'energy').
Since you need a system at least as powerful to evaluate the propositions of an underlying system and in that more powerful system a similar proposition can be formed.
Anologous to this is Wittgenstein's problem on the irreducibility of rules: that one can always ask for the explanation of a rule, explanation of an explanation an so on ad infinitum. So it is essentially impossible to determine whether a rule is being applied correctly or not. It so happens that we (humans) can stop asking and 'apply'; but I'm not convinced this is something machines cannot do.
You mean the innovation that 50% can trivially rewrite history, or something else?
> that's something that should be straightforward for app stores to screen for.
Also wouldn't it be relatively viable to gain update access to a popular existing application or to provide an innocuous application at first and then push a patch enabling this vulnerability?
There is no sample from a set problem involved, just convert b256 -> b62, there is a correct way to do this.
I read/skimmed the patent, I cannot find anything described which is obviously novel. Care to provide a quote of these particular features?
The Munich Agreement explicitly excluded the Soviet Union because the Western Allies hoped that Hitler would set his sights on the Communists and leave the West alone. By the time of the Molotov pact the USSR really had little to no choice.
The invasion of Poland by the USSR was criminal but whether Poland got divided or not was probably going to have little impact on the more general course of WWII at that point, in 1938 perhaps it still could have been averted (at least at the scale at which it occurred). Actually up until the pact in 1939 Stalin was still hoping for an alliance with the West.
I don't think it's irrelevant because certain foundations predispose one to certain lines of arguments. Particularly
>> If adults with kids aren't qualified for something more involved or demanding than grocery bagging
Not all adults have had an equal opportunity to obtain a skill-set that would qualify them for a better job and once you are stuck barely scraping by with a livable-wage it's very difficult to alter that situation. Culture and upbringing play a large part; children are easily impressionable, those growing up in troubled families or neighborhoods are less likely to do well in school and less likely to gain a skill-set that they would need to provide more value in the future.
> what is relevant was that earning minimum wage as a teenager helped my blue collar family since I paid for my own clothes, transportation, gas, food, school incidentals, and many other expenses.
I think it's great you were able to do that, but that doesn't mean that this minimum-wage would be sufficient for someone without a family to support them, or trying to acquire a skill-set later in their twenties.