mrmuagi

History lessons are pertinent to the degree you represent the facts therein accurately. Perhaps this is where the confusion arises. You claim the NSA has computational superiority to crack "whatever they want". If this is true, I posit that such a invention would be available to the private sector as it would represent and contain an immense technological innovation -- and not doing so would be a greater detriment than doing so.

> Email has hefty overhead per message.

I don't think that poster was talking about protocol innards, although kudos for you for having that knowledge, but perhaps they were, but in terms of user experience, slack/group chat is very low cost in terms of requiring any sort of mental pause before sending the message, specifically as a cost for the message itself. So much so, that a type of usage of verbal diarrhea can occur, so as to caution oneself against such usage, a little bit of thought before sending messages is always advised.

Specifically, if I can echo the primary differentiation, all you need to initiate a chat communication is a name and a message, that simplicity works a lot for people. I've used both e-mail and Slack, and a combination of both is great in my opinion, but the comparison can seen by an example message in my workflows (I don't use Slack anymore though):

Slack: 1) Find user/group by name lookup 2) Hi X, QUESTION_TEXT. 3) When done conversation, write outro

E-mail 1) Find user/group by name lookup, if user is not encoded in e-mail alias, query relevant databases 2) Write subject 3) Write intro, message, and outro

From my experience the reply from Slack 2) vs. E-mail 3) is much faster in the former case.

Sorry for the late reply, I had a look at what I have. I started off with orange 3M 1100 Foam Ear Plugs [0], but currently gone through two iterations of Moldex Pura-Fit Tapered Foam [1]. My main purchasing motivator is the decibel (dB) rating on the product, which blocks more sound -- which is standardized with Noise Reduction Rating (NRR).

[0] https://www.amazon.com/3M-1100-Foam-Plugs-200-Pair/dp/B008MV... [1] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BYAP7I

Ear plugs like ones made by 3M for construction workers has helped me sleep at night and study without distractions. Have you tried them?

What's the turn around time between receiving crypto currency and getting that into e.g. USD in a bank for you? As long as that is short, volatility is minimized.

I think the volatility issue is a major pain-point to people though. As long as you keep your money liquid in cryptocurrency, isn't it essentially holding stock (albeit driven by BTC mining and transactions) in terms of capital gains and losses? But if you use stock, I believe you are required to hold it for periods by the SEC (don't quote me, but, blah blah Holding Period?), so maybe crypto wins in this regard anyway...

Youtube-dl saved my youtube experience, as I have many playlists that have actually gotten entries deleted somehow, and I had then no recourse into recovering my playlist (often the uploader or another youtube denizen just re-uploads it, but I lost all information about the video).

> I was born in a Democracy. Democracy was forced upon me. I never gave my consent.

You were born without your consent too, therein lies the rub.

> There are plenty of people in America who continue to chase money long after their safe retirement is assured.

I mean take a look at rich (m/b)illionaires. It's a life style they can't give up.

> A single non elected ruler is going to make decisions on whim not process.

power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely

Not sure I totally agree that this achieves those goals, but I can't argue they would be ideal goals.

>interactive

AFAIK, as you type python code it will execute with the changes incorporated in the next loop execution. That's a heavily constraint "interactive" (forward propagating changes against an active execution). I mean, wouldn't a python shell with shell history be more interactive and hit all your goals? Sure the advantage of this is you can change code based on output feedback, but if you are too slow, you have to backtrack, and if you are too fast, you just wait anyways in both cases. And if you want to add code to earlier loop executions, you are kaput for earlier loop executions since those are set in stone against a different version of the code?

> reproducible

How can you get this, i.e. reproduce any loop changes outside of IDE/editor code undo/redo stack. It's hiding all the magic of what code outputted what with the "reloading" function.

> recordable, replayable

This moves the "history" to the IDE/editor code undo/redo stack. I think this is worse, cause, what happens when you close the IDE/editor without recording which specific console output was for which version of the code?

My main gripe is this sentence in the README:

> This lets you e.g. add logging, print statistics or save the model without restarting the training and, therefore, without losing the training progress.

If the italicised is the prime concern, and the purpose of this is to solve that, I'm just saying PyTorch already lets you save/persist training data, maybe the author didn't know about it + python shell combo?

You don't have to without this tool, you can save and load models from/to disk already from provided APIs for frameworks/libraries (e.g. [1]). Handy for when you need to hard reset, move, and/or share data.

[1] https://pytorch.org/tutorials/beginner/saving_loading_models...

Fear and outrage is a major component of driving traffic to news itself, no?

> So why is it that almost all my experience in taxis is that the driver seems to be a crazed maniac with a presumably diagnoseable rage disorder?

Payment is based on distance driven right? So more trips, more money. I could see the incentive like that to cause it.

News flash, a website like this is filled with a great deal of many people. Yes, even the likes of you are included therein.

> The driving factor is pretty obvious....

As a Canadian I am stumped, surely people don't like cold weather :)

Is there a difference between offering, say, $12 monthly opt-out & $10 plan for opt-in vs flat $12 with a $2 discount to opt-in?

The root thing here is the author said "C is a compiled programming language". According to the objection, C is also, an, interpreted programming language so its not the correct classification. That's the complaint I read...

I just don't see this complaint as valid. From the discussion garnered here, C be both a compiled and interpreted language. This is a book about C in the context of the compiled variant, and has references to gcc and clang. The level of detail and nuance when using terminology here is used to match the context the terminology appears in. Excess verbiage for terminology isn't a panacea to confusion, in fact it can increase it. Can't "C is a compiled language" and "C is a interpreted language" both be true independently?

Don't get me wrong, I like reading perspectives like yours, because I just discovered a bunch about C interpreters.

But I feel like you are asking for a "spec" level document on modern C, when you are reading a more practical work on it.

As another denizen of this chain, I still don't see the confusion at all.

> because languages are specification, "books". they are not interpreted nor compiled

Languages are a specification, and an implementation working together in perfect harmony, with absolutely no undefined behaviour at all, yes, keep walking now.

At least... the good ones try to be, cough ignoring small half baked interpreters and compilers I've had the pleasure of working with cough and never touching again.

> The most common implementations of the C language are compilers, yes, but "compiled" it's not a language property

It absolutely is a large part of the C language and worth teaching, and I'd only split hairs in a programming language theory class, this is a book that presumably leaves the reader with a better grasp of C than before. And arguing against it is an exercise in personal experience I assume (you have C interpreter experience I wager?).

Most people are still taught C in terms of a compiler like gcc, or clang. Source code in, object code (for a specific language specification, target architecture, etc) out. Think operating systems, kernel modules, executables, dll's, and, etc.

I never touched a C interpreter (but I am curious at such a beast), but I know that C is fine to be referenced as "compiled".

> moderation isn't "set it and forget it," you have to remove some and acquire others from time to time.

A great point. Succinctly, the moderators need moderators.

It reads like a professor's quirky landing page to me. I've seen a few of those.

History is extremely useful for being read. For backporting between trees, looking at historical development of a feature, to bisecting an introduced bug or regression.

Your suggesting feels good at a personal connection scale (i.e. you fixed my bug painpoint, have some dosh), but really to get the sort of traction where the donations are viable you'd be working at a much larger scale right? Plus, why should the donator does each do this all headwork? Charities make it easy to donate for a reason, it increases donations... Specifically on the topic of scale, if the donations are small enough to not run into this problem, they are probably too little to impact anything, hence scale matters if the donations do.

Ah, I misread it. Cheers!

I've seen myself make mistakes that in retrospect should be have been "obvious", and if you've ever taking a test (a la education), you've obviously made mistakes others deem "obvious" as well. Humans are complex beings, and I don't deny people opportunities to improve -- or even blacklist them.

Which leads me to why one such as yourself would be so adamant in your position to not include that empathy -- its not like moon hoaxers killed and murdered your family in 1990... right? I suspect its more of a philosophy you have regarding treatment of people in the bunch "gullible, anti-science" crowd. Anti-vaxxers, horoscope readers, etc. If thats the case, well, I too enjoy punching down.

> he fraternizes with the enemy are helping to contribute to America's polarization problem.

This statement is a bit ironic no? Then again I have no clue what helps get rid of polarisation.

Not really. The host serves a purpose to proke and prod the guest to direct and dissuade the flow of conversation.

Moreso that OP was noting that people can believe they have good social skills, whilst belittling others for their apparent lack of, whilst not catching on to the irony of the whole shebang.

> You whooshed on the point. If their workers are paid higher salaries, they'll turn around and spend that money, and a la supply and demand, more sales!

I did mention it, that's the whole cancel out thing I was trying to hint at.

I do really dislike this type of argumentation and tend to dismiss it because its first order argumentation without empirical evidence. The real world isn't first order, so real data should be used. The sort of stuff journalistic outlets use instead of economic institutes. I disagree that this is excuse-making however, because it is indeed analysis at an approximate level b/c its first order, but I take it you would probably take it that to be an excuse as well :)

Also an banal extension of that line of reasoning leads to a counter point -- The products that they purchase will cost more because of an increase in the cost of manufacturing due to minimum wage laws. However globalisation side steps this by getting third worlds to produce most of the products, so kahbooy to those laws.

> Details matter, making an argument like this without numbers isn't analysis, it's excuse-making.

I agree, but this is kind of a moot point, you are burning the bridge we both stand on and saying standing on it is excuse-making because one person faces north instead of south. It's excuse-making in two directions.

> And the counter point (with numbers!) is that people at the bottom of society are getting poorer.

Objective poverty is decreasing in the world, but in the lenses of America, I do think you are correct and I agree that the bottom of the society are getting poorer in a relative wealth inequality sense.

However as a side topic, there's a larger issue with financial ignorance I think exists too -- something that a higher minimum wage won't really counter. I mean, look at the high average debt, aggressive cash loans, lack of short term liquidity, etc, the poor of society suffer from or are explicitly targeted at. It's a whole system with people actively trying gut you for cash. A lot of it is just plain asymmetric power in terms of negotiating, knowledge, and opportunity. The poor get poorer, and the rich get richer, cycle of poverty 101. I personally believe wages should be legally adjusted for livability in a sense (the term liveable wage rings a bell, but I'm not too familiar) but the root cause of the issue seems to be in the education system and the affordability, proximity, and availability of it. Heck, I even like the idea of later-in-life re-training but I haven't dug into the data on that. Housing is also another can of worms.

> So... paying people more makes them less likely to eat at a restaurant? That logic doesn't work, you're forgetting the other side of the consumer equation.

It is often argued that it does, particularly by opponents of minimum wage increase. If they need to pay their salaries, they'll increase menu item prices, and a la supply and demand, fewer sales. This argument is for a single business only, I imagine the aggregate supply and demand is affected differently if one were to apply a minimum wage law instead of a hypothetical at one restaurant. Basic form of the argument would be if everyone makes more in a region, perhaps increases in prices are cancelled out. I'm not an economist, ymmv.

I came across something similar, I narrowed it down to Ulnar nerve entrapment which sounds particularly similar.