zxcdw

7 ms·

1.
by zxcdw 10y ago
> From a quick check it seems Twitter is getting better at it. Prices used to be more like in the low $20/k range. Now the low end accounts are $45/k and if you want PVAd/profiled it's up near $90. Compare to Gmail wh
2.
by zxcdw 10y ago
> 8gb should be the norm even for cheap laptops... Why? For example, why now , why not two years ago, or in two years time?
3.
by zxcdw 10y ago
I fail to see what you're saying. Are you saying that because a simple neural network could behave the same, such behaviour can't thus be evidence of inner speech?
4.
by zxcdw 10y ago
Though unified virtual memory isn't limited to Pascal -- AMD's GCN architecture has supported it for years already, as do these products.
5.
by zxcdw 10y ago
I don't understand what you mean in this context. Elaborate please?
6.
by zxcdw 10y ago
> because long term, they will be better off. Because long term, they believe they will be better off. And really, many people cast their vote as a protest vote for the current politics, rather than as a genuine opposition to EU.
7.
by zxcdw 10y ago
Does this reflect your view regarding development in C++ and Java and is your comment merely a lazy reflection of that?
8.
by zxcdw 10y ago
Link to a paper talking about this: http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full
9.
by zxcdw 10y ago
Why do you suppose they left it out? Is it merely a matter of "cheap implementation" being purely subjective, and hence they might have thought it as cheap, while you seem to disagree? Or could there be a more pressing reason, but
10.
by zxcdw 11y ago
> Then you don't really support property rights. Or we simply disagree what rights and liabilities the property owner should have in the context, which I define as business property. I see no problem with this as there are many coun
11.
by zxcdw 11y ago
> But you are. No, I am not. You're seeing binary where there is none. My point is not to abolish the notion of personal responsibility, but to acknowledge that there is more to human behavior and decision making than cold, rational
12.
by zxcdw 11y ago
(Note that I am not the person you replied to.) I do honestly feel that there should be a law against that in the society which I live in, since I find such actions taken by the restaurant owner to be manipulative and purposefully deceptive
13.
by zxcdw 11y ago
Is "Firefox mimicking Chrome" something you have an issue with for some reason, or what are you after?
14.
On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit [pdf](journal.sjdm.org)
2 points by zxcdw 11y ago|0 comments
15.
by zxcdw 11y ago
Not to nitpick, but yet another partial quote. Bravo.
16.
by zxcdw 11y ago
I do agree with you, though as a brief tangent (as if this horse wasn't beat badly enough here in HN during the past almost 30 months...), my personal concern is both political and ethical, and I suspect this same concern applies to
17.
by zxcdw 11y ago
Aren't the design choices and intended use cases vastly different though? Could this explain some of the difference in traction you perceive?
18.
by zxcdw 11y ago
I suspect it's a mere challenge for the "troll" to see if they can beat the system. If not, they'll try harder until they can . The more challenge the more rewarding it is, thus the harder they try and eventually succee
19.
by zxcdw 11y ago
Do you, or someone, have any data to back this up? Honest question, I don't use Facebook so I can't tell from experience.
20.
by zxcdw 11y ago
But isn't computer just the medium to access the real addiction-causing substance, whatever it may be? I mean, if you give person a computer of any kind without internet access, they'll likely feel just as anxious as not havin
21.
by zxcdw 11y ago
And I'd follow with creating incentives for people to actually pay for the content. Relying on charity isn't a sustainable source of income in general case.
22.
by zxcdw 12y ago
Have you, or someone else, got a source for this or articles/studies done? Not questioning it, just curious.
23.
by zxcdw 12y ago
This would benefit who exactly?
24.
by zxcdw 12y ago
Rust provides memory safety without VM to begin with. Although I do not like the comparison because it's not factually correct, Rust is like the "safe subset of C++". To write actual safe, modern C++ is very close to writing
25.
by zxcdw 12y ago
> and that it's our own fault Whose fault exactly is it? Has anybody in HN worked with a company which does this crapware bundling, let alone creating? Or does anybody know anyone who's "in the business"? Because I,
26.
by zxcdw 12y ago
I agree. But I'm also convinced that in practice there's absolutely no way to pressure OEMs to allow control over our devices in such way that it would lead to persistent computational opennes and freedom. Walled gardens and erode
27.
by zxcdw 12y ago
Care to elaborate why do you think so?
28.
by zxcdw 12y ago
I don't know why this was downvoted. I find it relevant for submissions like this, that there are people voicing that they'd appreciate ELI5-like summary which I don't think is hard to reason for, nor can I see how it could b
29.
by zxcdw 12y ago
Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8176654
30.
by zxcdw 12y ago
> There will never be a Grothendieck of biology because the mechanisms of life aren't so neat and ordered that they can reduced to first principles. Let us simulate the universe and let that simulation be the ruleset for the first p

More ›