If the author wants their code to survive the apocalypse, they should generate Turing Machines that have a simple shim interpreter for low-power architectures. The benefit of this is you can build an interpreter for a TM in wood or other simple materials. Semi-Thue systems also fit.
Definitely. Or mechanical logic gates. But the surface area would very quickly become an issue for such a project, and you'd need to assume only a certain few tools.
This software got me through a really rough hurdle in my earlier years. Had to automate data capture from an accelerometer on a Windows machine. You could only initiate the intended capture from a UI, so automating this for an assembly line testing jig was going to be a real hassle if not for AHK.
Remarkable piece of software. Wish something like that was for *nix.
I see a lot of people not wanting to offer alternative solutions to the treatment of this particular individual's content: if you're not in favor of removal, then what? This content can't be allowed to stand as-is.
I'm sure you'd complain about any measure other than leaving this individual alone. If so, you deserve to be angry, because you're part of the overall problem.
Edit: To remind all of you, downvotes should be reserved for things that are strictly disruptive or not contributing to discussion. Unless we're free to disregard the rules, now.
We could not tie hosting and media discovery and ad sales all together. No “social” crap or “you might also like” bubble-prompting algos on the site hosting the video and also selling the ads. That’d be a good start.
Same as “it sure sucks that Facebook has to abuse low-paid workers with gore porn but what else can we do?” I mean. We could not? Allow sites that require doing that to exist? Just a thought.
[edit] my point is that we look at these problems through a very narrow lens that excludes solutions that serious harm the profits of Internet giants. I think that’s silly. If their business model causes awful things maybe it shouldn’t be possible to have that business model.
Don't consider the downvotes as not contributing to the discussion, think of them as ... deplatforming your idea. It cannot be allowed to stand as-is, after all.
> if you're not in favor of removal, then what? This content can't be allowed to stand as-is.
have youtube put on a warning saying that this content is misinformation/wrong. But not censored because censoring "wrong" content just gives those who blindly believe it to feel that they're being targeted - it doesn't change their mind.
Censoring it is just promoting it to other underground channels that are more difficult to censor.
it looks less conspiratorial. if you see a warning, but you have the freedom to view it, you won't get emotionally triggered to think that you're being attacked. it's like banning books, vs putting a warning out about it, but continue to allow it to be sold and read.
The Palace was (and still has some servers) a 2D chat program. It was sold in retail stores and used a client-server paradigm similar to IRC. It allowed users to copy and paste their own images as avatars, and had a robust enough scripting language (based on Forth) that let you write a script for basically anything in the game. Even the channels were described in the scripting language.
I don't agree with the assumption that we need to ditch X11 entirely. Implementations are different from the spec, and a common complaint I have is that certain implementations are gathering code smells like nobody's business.
You can fix both an implementation and a spec by continued review and revision, while making choices to either remain backwards compatible or breaking that compatibility with newer revisions. I don't think Wayland is a good solution to this kind of problem, despite it being touted as one in many circles I've witnessed.
The competition is nice, though! I have yet to give Wayland a try, but it's on my to-do list some time on a fresh machine.
One of the arguments made by the Wayland spec folks (many of whom were involved in Xorg development for many years) is that the Xorg spec is also a major cause of problems with modern Linux graphics[1].
I agree with you. X isn't so bad and implementations are different from the spec (see my message about my proposed X12, which makes this more explicit).
X has long been a crufty dusty codebase. Due to a small amount of people that obsess about networking it has stayed alive. Hopefully Wayland hits critical mass and x can finally be old yellered as it should have been twenty years ago
What's interesting is that there's no "destination" for these chemical signals, they're just emitted into the void. There's no sense of sender/receiver, which has some correspondence to the blackboard model[1,2].
Yeah, exactly. The synchronous, one-to-one method calls of C++ or Java bare basically no resemblance at all to bacteria chemical signals. The former are essentially functions which dispatch on the first parameter.
The blackboard model isn't quite accurate though. Chemical signals have spatial locality, propagation delay, and half-lives. An asynchronous, peer-to-peer mesh network of actors would be a closer approximation to the bacterial signal model.
The original ideas behind Smalltalk did allow a void, as in modern day Kafka would be a void or a multi-cast IP address would be a void. There is no clear receiver, there can be multiple receivers or there can be none. Communication is ephemeral. Also, even with the single dispatch system of Smalltalk, we can easily model something similar to the Blackboard system.
Maybe not directly but I'm sure these organisms has knowledge of context which influence hormone release. I'd be surprised if it was totally or near totally blind.
I don't consider this "beating" the C version. The new version isn't even semantically equivalent. You had to resort to multiple cores. A parallelized C version of wc would probably be even faster.
