foxhill

29 ms·

241.
by foxhill 10y ago
to call this an assembler is to not give it credit where it's due - this is not an assembler, it's much more than that. it's a set of functions for bash that when sourced make the assembly a valid bash script which then run
242.
by foxhill 10y ago
well, it's a shame that poor arguments get recycled like this, but it does make for easy dismissal - cryptography is based off of the idea that the methods used totally transparent, the power to decrypt comes from possession of the app
243.
by foxhill 10y ago
> DeepMind IS Google. Asserting that it isn't doesn't magically make them a separate legal entity. in the context of this data, yes, there is significant distinction between the two. > Arrogant insults are not a useful form
244.
by foxhill 10y ago
> The data "got to" Google when it was sent to Google DeepMind. it did not. google own deepmind, but the restrictions on data usage are pretty tight. > I expect a HN to understand how this is usually impossible. Correlating
245.
by foxhill 11y ago
and the cache/memory hierarchy.
246.
by foxhill 11y ago
you're being down voted because your response does not contribute to the discussion; we all get it, people can feel offended from almost any statement - that is the point of this article.
247.
by foxhill 11y ago
credibility may help persuade belief in a statement one way or an other, but a court of law is (ostensibly) based on purely objective fact. i know this may shock you, but denigrating people who you do not agree with is something only people
248.
by foxhill 11y ago
and credibility seeks proof through authority, i.e not a proof at all. ad hominems have no place in rational debate.
249.
by foxhill 11y ago
they are not necessarily illegal operations; embedded systems and kernel development would be two such examples - an area where C is frequently used. i can list many reasons why i continue to use C, please, there's no need to suggest o
250.
by foxhill 11y ago
i believe the premise for a "friendly C" (wether attainable or not) is one such that, existing C programs can be compiled with a new compiler, which could, in principle, prevent certain classes of bugs. designing a new language so
251.
by foxhill 11y ago
i'm sorry, i'm all for market incentives to drive product development, but this is people's lives you're incentivising here. previously affordable treatment will be out of reach for many. there is a human cost to thi
252.
by foxhill 11y ago
your narrative of what defines racism is, whilst sort of poetic, entirely without merit. wether someone discriminates on race/sex, no matter what way for (e.g anti-white/male, etc.), you are being racist. that is all racism is. to
253.
by foxhill 11y ago
for reference, the estimated probability that a proton will spontaneously decay into a neutron in a second is ~4.1x10^-37. this has never been observed.
254.
by foxhill 11y ago
yay, another rant into the OS wars. and like all of them, flawed from the outset - this guy is happy with Linux or BSD, and nothing will ever top that.. alas, this is not the final flaw in this article; swipey bullshit - can be disabled.
255.
by foxhill 11y ago
what? am i going mad? people like this code?! comments are no replacement for readable and concise code, i tried to read this from start to finish - but i don't know where one block ends and the next begins. what the fuck does the vari
256.
by foxhill 11y ago
tldr; single bit flips in a hop to a remote server. the moral of this story is - the number of layers and abstractions between our code (even our shell scripts - cron jobs in this case) and the network layer is so large.. the most subtle of
257.
by foxhill 11y ago
seeing this made me excited - OpenCL is my thing - and i wanted to get into it and see if i could make it faster (this is also my thing) whilst there are certainly opportunities for optimisation in the kernel code alone, the fact that the h
258.
by foxhill 11y ago
i found this game to be very aesthetically pleasing - as well as having an emotive and thought-provoking story. it's good to see a game that pushes the creative boundaries of rendering, rather than focus on what seems to be a slow drud
259.
by foxhill 12y ago
this link is incredibly frustrating. what is s-lang? what does it look like? is it a scripting language? declarative? imperative? some odd hybrid? what is it's expected use case? show me something! not some page that (links to other pa
260.
by foxhill 12y ago
true, however my only complaint - > you don't want the total number of threads spawned to be more than the machine has that may not be necessarily true, and regardless, it might be a sane decision for yourself, but it might not be f
261.
by foxhill 12y ago
i think the true insanity lies within the mind of the developer whose build system depends on the number of jobs being ran in parallel..! interesting academic exercise though. unless i'm mistaken, this will only detect up to 32 build j
262.
by foxhill 12y ago
using cables for high speed links (~6GB/s) is hard, and whilst there are a few problems that do not require much host/device communication, there are a significant number that do - any increase in latency/decrease in bandwidt
263.
by foxhill 12y ago
i feel that you should have at least mentioned it, otherwise it feels like the article implicitly asserts that only NVIDIA GPUs exist, or perhaps even that you are some way not impartial (partial..? that sounds strange).
264.
by foxhill 12y ago
your comment reminds me of this - http://spritesmods.com/?art=hddhack&page=7 it makes you wonder how many Linux capable processors actually make up the computer you run..!
265.
by foxhill 12y ago
i'm always blown away when people reverse wire protocols like this - i don't even know where i'd start to do this sort of thing.. could this be used by apps on the device in any way?
266.
by foxhill 12y ago
> Consider the question of why someone would want to teach you this subject, when you are combative at every turn. i do not post opinions as invitations or expectations to lecture. only to discuss. if i disagree with you, it is a mistake
267.
by foxhill 12y ago
we can only change the legal landscape for now. if we do punish IBM for their involvement in apartheid, what will it change for us now? we already recognise it was wrong. we can discourage others from doing similar actions now, but aside fr
268.
by foxhill 12y ago
> Your statements reflect fundamental flaws in your understanding of the subject matter. my opinions are based on my observations. i observe companies being immoral all the time. there are a few notable exceptions - i think google are ge
269.
by foxhill 12y ago
> you can definitely capture part of your morals in law, like "don't kill" ah! but you can't! for instance, if someone was about to kill your partner - is it illegal to kill them before they succeed? yes. immoral..? g
270.
by foxhill 12y ago
> How do you know that? How can you prove that? come on, there's no need to be disingenuous - of course i cannot prove that. > Honestly, I wouldn't blame someone for stopping to read at that point. why? i don't believe

More ›