The article makes a point that contemporary hunter gatherers are not living the life like their ancestors. "Modern" cultures displaced them into much less favorable environments.
Even without displacement, the amount of game available in an area a few centuries ago must have been at least an order of magnitude more dense before unlimited commercialized overhunting and overfishing decimated populations.
Yeah, it's a high quality mouse. But the only excuse for this is it's slightly cheaper to make everything USB. PS/2 worked much better. It was limited to 200Hz but needed no polling. Motherboards just stopped providing the port.
If the computer has to do anything at all it ads to complexity and it isn't doing other things. One could do something a bit like blue screening and add the mouse pointer to the video signal in the monitor. For basic functionality the computer only needs to know the x and y of clicks. (it could for laughs also report the colors in the area) Hover and other effects could be activated when [really] needed. As a bonus one could replace the hideous monitor configuration menus with a point and click interface.
This polling is not done by the CPU, this is a common misconception. In a typical modern system the only polling that happens with USB is done by the USB host controller and only when there is actual data the host controller generates interrupts for the CPU to process it. Obviously, when you configure the mouse at higher frequency you will get more interrupts and hence higher CPU usage but that has nothing to do with the polling.
Can you provide some examples of frameworks with such pattern? I actually have never seen it in any of the Python or Go web applications that I had a chance to work with.
Mind pointing out where? I asked a pretty simple question and got answers insinuating I said things I didn’t. Of course we all enjoy things for different reasons. I don’t insist on anything. People are free to disagree on whatever and have their own stance. If people like Advent of Code, that’s great. I have looked into it before, and it’s not for me. And I was also simply curious why Norvig seems to like Python so much. He either likes it or it’s convenient as a marketing tool or both (i.e., it fits all his needs). None of those are bad or wrong or whatever.
In a thread about Peter Norvig solving AoC problems in Python, you bashed on 1) Peter Norvig, 2) AoC and 3) Python. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but your comment reads like someone jumping into an enthusiastic conversation among Star Wars fans to tell everyone how much you dislike Star Wars. I'm sure you didn't intend it that way (based on your later comments), but that's how it comes across.
I think bash is a little strong. There’s a lot of ways to view programming and to identify as a programmer. In many ways, it’s a lament of mine and a feeling of being an imposter that I don’t necessarily enjoy what many programmers seem to. I didn’t attack anything and only presented my personal opinion.
> I was also simply curious why Norvig seems to like Python so much
Why aren't you satisfied with his own explanations that you already knew about?
"I looked around for a language that was closer to the pseudocode in the book, and discovered Python was the closest. [...] Python is an excellent language for my intended use. It is easy to use (interactive with no compile-link-load-run cycle), which is important for my pedagogical purposes."
"I looked for the language that was most like our pseudocode, and found that Python was the best match. Then I had to teach myself enough Python to implement the examples from the textbook. I found that Python was very nice for certain types of small problems, and had the libraries I needed to integrate with lots of other stuff, at Google and elsewhere on the net."
Pure speculation but could it be a network effect? I frequently visit websites that were shared by coworkers and friends over text communicators that they originally found on HN.
Obviously, not all people vote or comment either so that's a second multiplicative factor.
Finally, causation != correlation, which most likely is your point, e.g. things on HN already spread from somewhere else.
There’s definitely a network effect. I had a post of mine do well on here which lead to a ton of mentions on Twitter and LinkedIn. There was probably more going on but I don’t run analytics on the site so can only make educated guesses as to where stuff was being shared.
Country's passport has a value in itself. The one from the US enables you to leverage international travel treaties and visa arrangements. Just answering your question, not making a point on whether taxation is the correct way for US to "cover" for those benefits.
No reason to be frustrated. Things are almost never right or wrong, particularly in complex science.
In this case, based on another comment above about "emergency procedure" having multitude of meanings, you're most likely wrong in that the paper has a rebuttal to the top post. The hypothesis then, is that the actual urgency of surgeries is not controlled precisely enough to state that they cannot affect the measurement.
> The major threat to the internal validity of our findings is that surgeons may selectively operate on sicker and more complex patients on their birthday, perhaps because those patients cannot have their procedures delayed. However, this is unlikely to explain our findings because we found that patients who underwent surgery on the surgeon’s birthday were similar in all observable characteristics to patients who underwent surgery on other days. Furthermore, severity of illness as measured by predicted mortality, and the number of procedures performed per surgeon, also did not differ based on whether a surgery occurred on a surgeon’s birthday compared with other days.
> we found that patients who underwent surgery on the surgeon’s birthday were __similar in all observable characteristics__ to patients who underwent surgery on other days
> Is the EU also going to come out with the "Right to breathe" and the "Right to go to the bathroom when you need to"?
Yes, when it becomes a practically accepted norm to violate that right. Is your point that government is overstepping the bounds, or that this type of right does not deserve protection? Or is it just about the semantics and definition of the word "right"?
> Rights are no longer something innate to all humans, they are something that the government gives to you when it wants.
I always thought that the humanity creates communities, countries and their governments to protect those rights, among other things.
You get customers by being nice to them. Being nice to customers means competitive pricing, high quality support, good documentation, easy integration, etc. It's all driving towards the same goal.
Naming good documentation and high quality support in conjunction with AWS is a bit weird to me. Though parent was talking about using their scale to improve prices. They might just reduce their margins at the moment.
It's not necessarily the same in outcome. Undercutting competitors can be a temporary thing. As soon as the competitors are eliminated you jack the prices up. Doing it to be nice to customers can potentially last even after competitors go belly up. Then again, Google's motto used to be "do no evil" (basically be nice to customers). That obviously went the way of the dodo bird.
Eventually. But Amazon has the headspace to drop prices for as long as they need to kill the new competition. Only someone like Google or MS will be able to keep up as long as they can automate a lot and use money from ads or software licenses to prop up their cloud business.
