mfukar

> as they have no interest in providing you a "practical demonstration" or anything practical at all.

That was my exact understanding.

> ...poetic qualities instead of marketability.

Implying, of course, that comparable levels of usefulness are already established.

I will reserve my judgment until I see an actual practical demonstration that establishes that usefulness.

Not miraculous at all. The motivation for complex numbers came out of trying to solve cubic polynomials (Tartaglia, Cardano).

Algebraic closure of a field. See the fundamental theorem of algebra.

4 hours of sleep and 6 hours of commute, I bet any person doing that is sane and happy.

Based on the information on the internet on topics I was taught at, I only have to say that access does not equal quality.

> Follow the money

Paint, for those of us with no familiarity with the US system, a picture.

Well, "big new" sounds like a destructive qualification. Why can't it be "big" and "old"? https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01208.pdf

I have no idea. I have been watching 5-6 similar Go projects (some with the same name) which lost interest (some stopped after first commit), tried to create their own versions of coreutils (incompatible), never saw adoption, testing, or support, and they all tanked.

go-coreutils is abandoned, and not POSIX compliant. It was meant to be a proof-of-concept, and it kind of was, in a negative way.

There's significant infrastructure in place that uses i386. It used to be fairly popular, I'm sure you can google it.

If you can't measure (very well?), how would you know the improvement in a certain use-case exists or not?

I suspect you know what 'feel' and 'perceive' mean, and just being quarrelsome.

The FCC are appointees, not elected.

Well, it does say

> At least I can feel the difference when typing.

What benefits, precisely, though? New bugs? http://insert-script.blogspot.de/2017/11/firefox-settings-co...

> Nobody told them that backdoors are detected and leaked or cracked

Many experts have told them. They have told them that 'backdoored' is contradictory to 'strong.

The impression I get - being as far away from this debate as any other non-US citizen - is this request for "strong but accessible" "encryption" is repeated by administration and echoed by media consistently. Eventually, every citizen with the limited understanding and memory that we have to spare will be asking 'why aren't our scientists giving law enforcement what they need?', instead of what does that actually mean. In a way I find myself very fortunate to be on the side of the pond where these voices still exist, but reason temporarily prevails.

Not quite like that at all. The Minoans were known to carve semi-precious gemstones and the Mycenaeans known to have adopted it from them from the 16th century BC (source: "Encyclopedia of European Peoples, Vol 2, entry on "Mycenaeans", "Minoans: Life in Bronze Age Crete", R. Castleden). From Minoan sealstones which are already exhibited in museums, the level of detail seems comparable to me. I'm not quite sure where the contrast with classical Athens in the article comes from.

The bar can literally not go any lower

Yeah, Andrew Fucking Tanenbaum needs to expand his resume.

Things change, nostalgia happens. Nothing to see here.

I might try it again sometime in the future, when it doesn't take more than 5 seconds to get a result to a query.

Is that an opinion?

It's not a new approach; the equivalence was published ~1999 IIRC. It also affects speedup; tensor slicing can now be fully parallelised.

The phrase is used in English to convey the same meaning, as well. The GP is probably being intentionally dense for some effect that eludes me.

I'd only made the acquaintance of Michael through a mutual friend. In but a few hours, I became convinced this person is one in a billion. What a pity.

https://www.qualys.com/2017/06/19/stack-clash/stack-clash.tx... might help understand the exploitation method.

You've missed the point. "Trusted", signed applications can do the same things this PoC did.

Are you implying you (or anybody) can somehow verify the intentions of any macOS app?

You should publish.

> It's uncontestable that currently operating reactors generally lack certain safety measures we'd have added if we built them today.

It is, because it is also a tautology. To me it has no bearing over the point we're discussing.