There's some speculation about where the next breakthroughs will come from at the end of the chapter; it will be interesting to look back in 10-20 years and see if Knuth was correct.
> The US seems to have been in a cultural decline for much of the last 100 years.
Can you explain what, exactly, you mean by this? Looking back 100 years, I can't help but see an enormous amount of improvement in culture, at least in terms of the tangible impact of culture on the lives of people living in the USA.
And in fact, if you read the article about Tide, the people who are buying Tide, no questions asked, from anyone who wants to sell it to them are committing felonies and are tracked down in sting operations.
I've worked with a lot of contractors. Invariably, if you bitch about guberment and then have a polite chat with the ones who make these kinds of offers, they're trying to get around paying taxes. This might be anecdotal, but it's not pure speculation.
You can disagree with the tax system in the US, but that doesn't make tax evasion legal.
Not really. E.g. there's no ordering in function composition that isn't also in high school math. Also, you shouldn't depend on e.g. maps processing elements in a given order.
My impression is that statement ordering is easier for mediocre but competent programmers than it is for excellent programmers. The reason is that writing correct imperative code is non-trivial, but writing correct-y imperative code is pretty easy. So someone who's carefully thinking things through while learning will have a more difficult time with simple assignments, because -- at least while learning -- they're essentially trying to construct the correctness proof in their head. And that's pretty hard for imperative code.
> which incorporates the notion of time and communication of proof.
Certainly constructive logics (typically) incorporate a notion of evidence/proof. But constructive logics don't incorporate notions of time or communication (of proof, or in general).
> i didn't get whether they were able to show an actual path of how UA could have occurred
I think the answer is no -- there was never a clear demonstration of an extant buggy execution trace. Just a preponderance of evidence that such a trace could exist.
I believe that when the recalls occurred, at least several models of Toyota/Lexus cars were affected.
Ultimately, it's impossible to know without being inside. I would imagine there's a fair bit of reuse within each manufacturer and very little sharing between manufacturers
> Are the police allowed to act on charges and arrest individuals?
Yes. Although the arrest can happen before the charge, typically a judge will issue an arrest warrant as soon as the charges are filed.
And given the >90% conviction success rate in the USA (at least in federal cases), it's a pretty good bet any charges filed will stick if the prosecutor wants them to.
I think the logic goes that out of everyone at this company -- probably dozens or hundreds since OP says it's well known locally -- OP was the one that the plaintiff knew about and called up. Probably because the OP is a big-mouthed trouble maker and everyone knew it. Or something.
Whereas everyone else at the company were good team-players and kept their mouth shut and head down, so the plaintiff wasn't sure if s/he could count on their testimony or if they even knew anything.
Again, just explaining how someone might fear the logic would go. Not saying anyone does or should actually think like this.
From the article: Situations Where A Client/Server RDBMS May Work Better... High Concurrency: SQLite supports an unlimited number of simultaneous readers, but it will only allow one writer at any instant in time.
I've used SQLite over NFS for replication. It worked fine.
If you are not near an Ikea and can't think of an excuse to do a day road trip to the nearest one, you might consider some of the motorized/adjustable desks on Amazon (just search for those terms).
Arbitrary page limits cause far more harm than good in academic writing.
Dissertations and journal articles are some of the most readable and useful academic publications in computer science precisely because this attitude of "16 pages of bits ought to be enough for anyone" isn't enforced.
Without artificial page limits, it's possible to explain an idea from the ground up without taking shortcuts. Enforcing a prohibitive page limit is far more likely to force clever writing than good communication.
It is. Typically if you publish in a respected and peer reviewed journal, you are required to disclose sources of funding in the article. Especially if those sources include for-profit companies, you're in for a world of hurt if you don't.
But the "scientific community", so far as such a thing exists, can't censure news reports, government reports, or corporate reports that claim "X is true because science". It also cannot stop someone from publishing a "scientific" journal.
"Science" is not a Trade Mark, and scientists cannot solve for clueless consumers who believe everything if you say "because science!" Especially when those same consumers fail to fund / pay attention in quality post-secondary science education.