The things that are priorities in the USA have always puzzled me. Students pay an absolutely insane amount of money for an education that is very mediocre. It is clear that the American education is failing. About half of the population voted for a man who does not believe in science. But somehow, the main priorities for universities seems to be enforcing diversity and gender-neutral pronouns?
I am not saying that thinking about this is wrong, there is just a deep disconnect with the realities that people live in, and many people seem to have a problem viewing things from another perspective.
That is absolutely false. Since I have my computer science/math degree my linkedin inbox has been flooded with messages from recruiters. I can guarantee you that they are not looking for an English major.
Sometimes you just have to bicycle close to cars. Even if you take the effort to see inside parked cars (it is probably better to just watch the road), it is simply impossible to evade suddenly opening car doors if they are opened at just the wrong time.
Its a bit like saying that cyclists just have to avoid you if you would suddenly jump on the biking line.
I am quite surprised that PulseAudio has a bad reputation. I couldn't get ALSA working on Arch Linux, and simply installing PulseAudio resolved all my issues.
From the sentiment here I get the feeling that it might stop working any moment.
I'm not sure why the author included 'floating point' in the title (probably to hint that the Babylonians did not use a symbol for zero, and had the point floating in blank space). To technical-minded people, floating point is synonymous with hardware that computes using a floating point representation, so this is a bit deceiving.
The Babylonians already used a composite-ish system for numbers < 60: They had a different symbol for 10. However, smaller numbers were represented by repeating the unit symbol (which is not very clever).
I guess that the least confusing transcript to modern notation would be something like
7, 24
It is very characteristic for philosophy to have a very clearly defined question, and a very long and pompous essay which does not provide an answer at first sight.
I have skimmed the paper. It seems that they assume that the writes are skewed (e.g. some parts of the memory gets written to more often). This seems to be a reasonable assumption for real-life situations, but I am not sure if 'random writes' is an appropriate name (since usually people assume random to be uniformly random).
(Not 100% sure if I understood this correctly, though)