HN user
We just have to be careful so that "the cure doesn't become deadlier than the disease": in case some magnetic particles are left in it could cause greater issues perhaps than plastic. We can't just assume that "yeah don't worry bro the magnets will surely remove all magnetic particles".
To be honest if you know C#, Java or ObjectiveC you already know the core 90% of C++.
The main thing left is understanding pointers vs references vs stack vs heap allocation (egthe instance.x vs instance->x difference) because C++ has those explicitly different pointer vs non-pointer intances of "instance", while C# or Java hide that difference (so if you know C# you can slightly think of it as struct vs class in C# difference since struct is copy-by-value while class is always a reference (a pointer).
Moving away from objects doesn't make sense: objects are perfectly fine and usable. It all depends on the context. Anyone who says "don't use objects" is a religous zaelot who does't see the forest for the trees anymore. For certain extreme performance cases objects can be bad, but in ~95%+ of cases objects are perfectly fine. We are again starting to enter "it all depends on the context" territory.
IMO C++ got some very bad rep for no reason at all: it got mythologized into a "very difficult arcane language that people makes meme about". So because of this people think C++ is some boogey man, while it's really not. Unless you are making life-critical software like avionics it honestly isn't much more difficult than C# or Java.
Ironicaly you already understand the difference between pointer and non-pointer since you know instinctively that an "int" type is will get fully copied while in Java a class object is a reference (pointer). C++ just makes this even more explicity since YOU can decide if a class is a copy-by-value or a reference on the fly (assuming the class doesn't have complex sub-fields inside of it that require their own complex copy-by-value vs reference rules).
Also due to C++ being mythologized as an "super difficult language" you get some extra XP on resumes if you state that you know it.
This will be a failure of epic proportions.
Due to the complexity of the real world we can't even predict weather for 2 days in advance and you they think they can predict the world...
The sad part is that they will then use this model and its result to create policies not knowing that you can never rely on such a "copy" because even the smallest difference will create an insane amount of divergence even 1 day down the line of future simulation let alone years...
Or they have it completely upside-down:
Those parents who adopt a more enterprenurial mindset are able to make more money.
Thus they pass on this enterprenurial mindset on their children.
Children of middle class workers are indoctrinated into a 8 hour job.
In the same way one can think that children of enterprenurs are indoctrinated into entreprenurship.
Obviously being a company owner will net you much more money than being a worker.
Most middle class people are feeling guilty just for asking for a raise.
Children of enterpreneurs think completely differently.
And what if the other guy is wrong and he is attacking me and trying to get me fired regardless of the fact that he is wrong?
You fail to understand that these people cannot be reasoned with.
It doesn't matter if you are wrong or not: those people cannot be reasoned with so you do not really have a choice but to go on the offense regardless of the means you use.
Those people want you gone, fired. You will either do something about that in any way you can or you will lose your income.
There is no "rational" way fighting against someone like that. The person who is attacking already is irattational. Thus neither logic, nor common sense nor good will counter arguments will help you.
That person is like a rabid dog, once it sees you backing down it will only go in for the kill.
Stop thinking that you can "logic" or "talk" your way out.
An offense from your end, regardless if its rational or irrational is your only way of keeping your job.
Would you try to reason your way out when attacked by a mentally ill person? Obviously not, you'd know that there is no way of reasoning with someone whose world view is so warped and who is full of irrational hatred for someone who hasn't directly harmed him.
Stop thinking about logic and arguments, they will be your doom.
Going on a severe counterattack against them is your only option. The bully will only attack you harder if he sees you backing down.
But show the bully that you will punch back and he will lose his power. This might sound like a cliche but people severely underestimate the wisdom of this statement.
Also note that there is no "moral high ground" here. The person who is trying to make a stranger jobless obviously doesn't care if you or your family will starve. So the cancel culture proponent already ignored any an all morals since he obviously doesn't know your life situtation and is trying to cancel you anyway.
So really the only "moral" thing to do here is to destroy them back.
This is the most important part that needs to be understood:
Don’t back down. Don’t apologize. Don’t make clarifications, and don’t try to appease the mob. All of these will only be taken as concessions, and embolden the mob to demand more.
Also forgot to add, as he also writes: "Mock them mercilessly". This is the keypoint also.
Backing down never works, you have to mock them and attack them back.
East German commies would be proud to have you.
Nothing says dictatorship better than having a ill-defined concept such as hate-speech combines with the power of the ban hammer.
Please not that if you downvote this comment you will be producing hate speech against me and you WilL bE rePoRteD tO tHE LoCOaL AUtHoRItHIEs!!1
If only it truly were a mere caricature then the world would be a much better place.
"When you know it isn't true".
Really?
Teenagers are addicted to social media and adults get addicted to news media.
Both are based on fear mongering and the fear of missing out. Do you not see that underneath the problem is the same?
Lets not pretend that the current news media is any different. There is no objective fact reporting, only fear mongering.
The hyperbole is not absurd and is there for a reason: it is meant to show people the arrogance of scientists and their inability to comprehend that messing with complex systems has unpredictable consequences that cannot be studied.
You didn't get my point.
GMO mosquitos are a completely UNPREDICTABLE path.
We cannot do this in isolation because we never know if that would eg affect bird population or if we geneticaly modify mosquitos that can have unintendend consequences that no study can predict.
Do not fool yourself that you can "make a study" for everything: you cannot. You can never predict what will happen if you mess with nature on a genetic level.
This was already proven to be true when they released some GMO mosquitos which were not being able to reproduce.
BUT WAIT!
They were able to reproduce sooner or later again!
How shocking! Who would have thought!
And those scientists then said "this was not supposed to happen".
These scientists got the problem completely wrong, up-side-down: they believed that they "studied" the problem enough. The believed that they "knew enough" that this "should not have happened".
But they won't ever learn that complex system (which is pretty much everything in nature) cannot be "studied and come to a conclusion with a high degree of confidence".
"High degree of confidence" and "complex system" are opposites that cannot appear in the same sentence.
“These were otherwise healthy, hard-working people,”
Healthy and obese cannot exist in the same sentence.
Also what does "hard working" have anything to do it? As if their hard work will offset some karmic debt that they own to their employers?
"...found that 77% of nearly 17,000 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were overweight (29%) or obese (48%)."
You are implying you can mimic all the required processes and not end up with too much or too little macro/micro nutrients.
This is not possible due to nature's complexity. Until we will be able to use nanomachines to analyize individual proteins and cells we won't know how the body works on a global scale so you will end up with incorrectly guessing how much micro/macro nutrients the meat will have.
Over time artifical meat will be a disaster as far as nutrients go, saying that you can "grow good meat that can compare to natural meat and has all the required nutrients as natural meat" is arrogant and shortsighted, but I don't expect anything more from modern scientists.
This might protect children for a while but sooner or later they will become addicted to it.
We will have to modify/add this to our educational system, there is no other way around it or parents will have to teach children this themselves (which is problematic since adults themselves are also addicated so we are missing a huge part of the puzzle of how the mind truly works).
A lof of adults think they are not addicted to twitter/facebook/hackernews but they somehow magicaly find themselves browing hackernews and facebook "suddenly and for no reason at all".
This seems to be one of the few books that actually works in practice: it is about porn addiction but it seems to be applicable to social media addication also.
Why must every new language use a completely unique syntax?
This is so tiring...why can't they just stick to syntax that everyone knows...each one has to reinvent random new syntax and destroy old conventions that people already know thus needlesly creating friction.
This, the famous "prediction* Pi" rule seems to be correct also in my experience.
I make the most optimistic prediction and then * PI.
And it's humans who decide what "science" is based on their incorrect p value selection and corruption and mishandling of statistics even if they mean good.
This is a naive argument: the "X is a private company and can do anything they want" is completely wrong when you can affect hundreds of millions of people with a few click through your platform.
Once a company can affect X million+ people they become a direct manipulator of societal/democratic opinion.
How can you be so bad at PR & Customer Support in 2021?
The person in charge of this should really go on Facebook every once in a while to see what can happen...
a reputable, privacy-first organization...
Are you a shill for them? "Reputable" as mainstream media? "Reputable" as in the fake news is reputable?
Whenever someone claims "I am reputable" you should run away as fast as you can.
This "I am reputable" is purely subjective based on your own biases and incentives.
No one can be reputable in the news space and people must understand this as soon as possible: everyone lies, even natural science which is supposed to be the gold standard gets so many studies wrong.
The only way news organizations stay alive is either by: a) clickbait articles which eventualy devolves into lying or exaggeration at best. b) News orgs that are financed by private people/corporations who have their own agendas.
There is no such thing as a "reputable" news source.
Perhaps one in ten thousand jounralist is still legit, so that he is an actual investigative journalists. But 99.999 of "journalists" are actually just script readers and clickbait writers.
Do you not see where "I am reputable" leads to? Soon the "I am reputable" organization will get political power and then they will make laws based around "my reputable reporting" and this will lead to censortship.
"I am reputable" always leads to censorship down the line since it implies that "my opponent is not reputable and is lying and MUST BE SHUT DOWN IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY".
This. Destroy natural environment so that only yours can be used.
Kids are exposed to war, violence and action everywhere.
The media being the most shewd example of this: pretending to have a moral highground while causing massive fear and outrage because that is the only reason people return to their websites and then report on real crime in a subversively grusome-but-not-grusome way to pretend to have a moral highground while clearly getting the severity of the crime in the text in a more shrewd manner to avoid getting explicitly called out.
A kid will eventually get a toy tank if he wants it, if not from Lego then from somewhere else.
So if this is Lego's core mantra that's fine, it's their company.
But if Lego did this just to appease some activists then they shot themself in the foot. The kid will get his tank toy in the end, war machines & action are fascinating to boys.
Reminds of that meme that I can't find now: It shows how every open source proponent dreams how many people collaborate as a group on the project.
In reality it's just one guy that makes 99.9% of all commits and without him the project wouldn't even exist, everyone else is insignificant and irrelevant to the project.
I'm suprised why people are still suprised by this.
Has no-one learned by now that you cannot trust _ANYTHING_ that the media produces?
Banazadeh said that the original image was so detailed you could check out individual rooms.
"Hello this is the EU, you satellite does not comply with GDPR".
Why is "black" being spelled with a capital "B"?
Your daily reminder that this will lead to more and more censorship: people will caught on an explode on some other part of the internet.
But as long as it's not on their platform is all that matters.
Incentives.
This. Moderne parents have children much later so the children might have to end up supporting their parents before they even have a familiy of their own which puts a huge financial strain on them, preventing them from having more kids.