The Turing test is most specifically highlighted in movies like Blade Runner or Ex Machina where it’s a noire with a lone robot in a room being tested. In reality the future is more like Westworld where there are so many robots that can pass a basic Turing test that people are constantly engaged in more intense Turing tests at all times.
I’m not saying they were, I’m saying you are.
Removed by mod
Lol good luck on that promotion, you seem difficult to be around.
I wonder how your company handles performance reviews when you already know everything about all types of programming?
That variable is only created when the function is run, and it holds a constant value for the entirety of its lifetime.
It is literally constant from the perspective of the computer executing it. You’re the one adding an extra layer of expectation here.
Removed by mod
Lol.
Pushing something onto an array isn’t changing the array? It’s not changing the reference to the array, but from a style standpoint it doesn’t make sense.
So you’re arguing for writing things as they seem, not the way that computers treat them?
You’re comment indicates the FE dev obsession with always using const stems from a misunderstanding of how computers work.
Maybe rethink this.
You are literally just describing the conceptual differences between functional programming and object oriented programming. It has nothing to do with front end vs backend, except for the fact that React has vastly popularized functional paradigms on the frontend.
If you come from a Java / Spring background, that will seem foreign, if you come from an express background it will feel natural.
Functional programming is extremely pleasant though. Its been described as what object oriented would look like if you actually followed all the SOLID principles. You should keep an open mind.
The equivalent in JavaScript / TypeScript would actually be function () {}, this is the syntax for named functions.
C# is the same as bash though.
A lot of the nuance is also one of threat assessment, and risk tolerance.
We can prepare for a situation where we’re attacked by the US, but given all probabilities is that worth it compared to preparing for a situation where we get attacked by China or Russia, or is that even worth considering vs preparing for a situation where we can ramp up industrial military production as fast as possible and become a resource rich manufacturing powerhouse?
There’s no way of knowing which path the world will go down, and preparing for everything simply isn’t possible, so every decision is going to be a matter of what risks to take for what potential benefits.
At the moment, no, probably not, and it’s not either / or. Drones were a surprise in Ukraine, but their effectiveness has somewhat diminished as new counter measures like jamming, and just basic stuff like netting, are starting to blunt their usefulness.
Meanwhile they’re still getting hammered by glide bombs, modified heavy bombs that can use GPS to find their targets and are launched by traditional aircraft, far away from the front line, and some of their most effective weapons have been the Storm Shadow / Scalp cruise missiles, which are also launched from traditional fighter jets (which effectively act as a first stage).
And again, it’s not one of the other. In an actual war, either aggressive or defensive, you’re going to want a mixture of capabilities… You can’t always zerg rush.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Valve innovated a package manager, a store, strict DRM, and gambling / third party cosmetic markets.
Very recently they built the Proton compatibility layer.
No, they wouldn’t.
Anti-trust law exists to prevent companies from overcharging consumers, something they can do when they don’t have competition.
Valve keeping their prices far higher than costs is something that can open them up to anti-trust scrutiny. Competitively lowering their prices while still maintaining profitability cannot, as that is the exact goal of anti-trust laws in the first place.
It’s also fucking wild that gamers hate Tim Sweeney so much. What has he used his fortune to do? Build a reasonably priced and powerful third party game engine that makes it easy for indie developers to build games, spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to break up Apple and Google’s walled garden 30% bullshit, launched a PC store to try and do the same with Steam, and bought tens of thousands of acres of US land to preserve for nature conservation. Oh what a moustache twirling monster!
That means that gamers have been ripped off for decades.
They couldn’t just make YouTube suddenly stop working.
ffmpeg is published under the LGPL license, meaning that all of the published versions are free for anyone to use in anything, as long as they don’t modify the ffmpeg library.
The only leverage they have over YouTube is that they could stop allowing YouTube to use future versions. That could create headaches for YouTube if it turns out there’s major security issues, since then YouTube will need to either solve them with a wrapper / sandbox around the library, or write their own library, but any existing versions in use will always be usable by YouTube.
Nope, night owl who likes to sleep in.
I mean, I broke my hand and it never healed properly, I have pretty bad tendon damage in one ankle, I got shin splints like crazy when I started running, and I have previously herniated a disk, though not that major.
I’m not saying every single major injury is recoverable from, but look at the history of most athletes and you’ll see a lot of major injuries that they were able to recover from.
Again, not saying this is the case necessarily for your back, but I know people who have gotten relatively minor injuries, gotten terrified of them and/or used that as an excuse not to do any more exercise on that body part ever, and then got severely injured again because now the muscles and muscle control for that body part is severely undeveloped, putting more strain back on the tendons / ligaments.
The general recommended approach for most injuries is not to avoid them forever, but to do physio; i.e. reducing your exercises back down to zero weight, but still doing them, and continuously adding weight to re-build and strengthen those muscles and joints.
False equivalency.