I was astounded how much better I was than my classmates at coding, testing, debugging, etc. I attribute all of it to the 25 hours a week I spent at work.
I'm not really sure this is 100% true. I recently got a fight confirmation email and immediately started getting "things to see in LOCATION" push notifications from Google maps. I'm not sure of course that they really read my email, but it did convince me to look at alternatives.
Nobody is adapted to asynchronous communication, it's always going to make you less productive. The key is that your immediate request is forcing someone else to put down their thing to help you, the same way that other people interrupt you when they message you. In optimizing for team performance, we don't get individual maximums.
Mostly, try to reduce switchyness. Not all input is blocking, sometimes you can put a question out early and have hours/ days/ weeks before you need an answer. Work on identifying potential hangups early and often. Try to handle your communication in batches. Respond to urgent messages faster, but spend time between deep tasks or in the lame duck part of the day doing email.
Basically a linear array is packed tightly, so trying to put something in the middle, well first you have to move what's already there. Because it's packed tight, you end up having to move everything to the right one space from the right back to where you're creating a hole. Then you can put what you want in the middle. Sometimes you get lucky and you're adding something far to the right and don't need to shuffle many items first, but sometimes you need to put it on the very left and reshuffle the whole thing. You'll never have to shuffle anything twice, but is possible to end up shuffling everything once so we say it's O(N) which means never takes a crazy multiple of the number of items.
In my opinion, the main reason to have `async` is because it doesn't require knowledge of generators. I've worked with developers who thought that `async`/`await` was too much trouble to learn and unnecessarily complicated. Promises allow us to act like nothing changed and functions return values. The trick, to me, is how do you meet that need without sacrificing these more powerful operations.
Did you see that this is a command line app (like VI, or EMACS)? Those libraries look like they're used for GUIs. Do you know if they can be used for the terminal?
> In recent years, study after study has found that living in neighborhoods with abundant green space is linked to positive health outcomes.
But it specifically calls out trees as more beneficial than other green spaces.
> But when it come to promoting human health, not all green spaces are created equal. That’s the conclusion of new Australian research, which finds higher levels of wellness in areas marked by one particular manifestation of the natural world: leafy trees.
So it's not contrasting "nature" vs. "stacked concrete boxes", it's comparing "green space w/o trees" (e.g. a lawn) to "green space with trees" (e.g. a park with trees).
From the article, it wasn't a XOR, the "key" was that there was a bit sequence when interpreted as Morse code said something like "copyright ATARI". So, reasonably easy to show it wasn't just pulling the message out of thin air.
In C#, your tasks are submitted to the ambient task scheduler. In ASP.NET, this is (I believe) the main thread pool that handles requests. The only time I've ever had to care where something was running is when adding response headers because that's available as a thread local API that can't happen on another thread, but it's generally ended up as a "it hurts when I do this" kind of situation.
My 2 year old is learning road safety and how to walk on the side of the street, but she's still safer when I'm with her because as an adult, I can understand things like getting hit by a car that I haven't experienced first-hand and I'm much less likely to get distracted by a cat or bird or whatever. Honestly on our street enough chickens and dogs and horses and tractors get out that I'm not actually worried about her getting hit, but she's also infatuated with irrigation canals and cannot swim, so I don't let her walk alone. I strongly disagree that this makes me a bad parent, despite your assertion that "she'll need to be autonomous someday, why not today?" Sure, she'll learn all this and more, but teaching takes time, and there's more to life than ensuring your kids could survive alone at the earliest possible age.
She still wants her mommy to kiss her knee when she scrapes it, my priority is not teaching her to clean and bandage a wound.
Yeah, Getty is selling photos that are public domain. Photos in the public domain are already free to use, though some people might pay to have peace of mind that they didn't take a similar, not-public domain work by mistake or something.
I have a dream that rural work will become more popular. I live in a city where all the local kids go to the oil fields or get out of Dodge, but I've heard a lot of comments from families that they'd do just about anything not to work out of town. With remote work, you could have more families and offset the retiree population, making this a more vibrant community. Does anybody have experience with starting a coders group in a low-density area like this?
This reply made me even more confused. According to my naive understanding of floating point there are 53 bits for the mantessa (sp?) so in my head, you would specify a exponent of 2^(-53) and fill the mantessa with random bits to get a "pretty good" random number. If you wanted to represent every possible value of a double, then you have to vary the exponent and your distribution becomes non-uniform. I assume I'm missing something fairly obvious to others, but your value seems to be exactly one bit short of the "ideal" (if you call it that, but really it's just my imagination of a "perfect" random double). I see your reply mentions you can get back that bit, but I don't understand why it has to be it's own step. What limitation of doubles are you overcoming when you use the range 1-2 and then subtract one instead of just generating in the range 0-1?
So, am I correct that this would give you effectively 52 random bits instead of the maximum 53? Is the problem that the 53rd bit would mean there are possibly invalid values you'd have to throw out, or that the distribution wouldn't be uniform?
So, I'm the author and I'm aware there are smarter people than me working on things like this, but my question is mostly whether there's a threshold where things can be useful. As an honest question, in C++ I think there's a "stack limit" of like 15 deep for generic types to avoid the fact that the types are Turing complete. Is there something that can be done that addles the type system but makes useful things possible? I think that just because something isn't possible in the general case doesn't mean that the specific cases people are likely to encounter are impossible.
That's generally not how things go. I don't know the details of this exact thing, but generally there will be two "very yes" responses, a "kinda yes", a "kinda no", and to "very no". You throw out all the "kinda"s and pay attention to the "very"s. 25% "very no" is a serious black eye, it's probably like 60% "kinda"s.
Well, given that Rust and C# also have these features I think the likelihood that the patent is upheld is unlikely. I guess they could threaten you with it since lawyers are expensive, but it seems silly to me.
I read it as the author almost never uses the uninitialized data and when they do need a zeroed array it's simple to do so why pay the cost to initialize the elements when you're about to set them anyway.
"Modern Healthcare decided to see how long it would take to present the data in a more consumer-friendly format. It took less than two hours - with a break for lunch - to create the 29 PDF files linked below."
How can you consent to learn about something you don't know about? This is a very different idea to me and I'm trying to understand where you're coming from.
Beckerman, in the 25-page written ruling, declared that
Järlström may study and, communicate publicly or privately
about his theories relating to traffic lights, as long as
his remarks occur outside the context of any employment or
contractual relationship with a governmental or other
group that regulates traffic light-timing.
I'm guessing this means that it's not calling yourself a doctor, but practicing medicine without a license that'll get you in a whole heap of trouble.
Between a wedding, maternity and newborn photos (x2), I can tell you that just because you're paying somebody to take pictures, does not mean you have any copyright. People (esp. small-time people) are starting to sell the rights but it's far from a given and it has to be stated in the contract.
No idea, but it seems like the news is allowed an exemption from royalties because of "fair use" or whatever they call it in Europe now (maybe "protected use" or something).
From the article, the artists claim that they were approached by a firm to buy the copyright to the tattoos for a clothing line and then once the deal was done, the firm went after 2K, they say they didn't actually intend for this to happen, and they don't own the copyright anymore.
Sounds like they wanted to be a little more aggressive rather than just putting lipstick on that same pig. By specifying the new method they can clean up the rough edges for performance or ergonomics without breaking existing code.