You're really twisting what happened here. It wasn't so much "yanked" as it was "replaced". I was initially against the idea, but soon got around to it. It was a very risky and daring move by the government, but it was a good one.
I don't understand this, AFAIK a problem is NP-Hard or NP-Complete (or P) in _general_, that is, over all instances. But not so for a specific instance. Wouldn't these games count as just one specific instance of the problem?
If someone wants a more detailed explanation about the gates mentioned in the blog, consider reading the introductory chapter to 'Quantum Computation and Quantum Information' by Neilsen and Chuang.
I don't think the author necessarily means being a CEO is an unworthy line of work. What he wants us to understand from this is that it's futile deriving one's worth from the fact that he's the CEO and that he has the ability to boss other people around, but instead he must seek worthiness from the fact that he has the potential to bring about significant change in this world; more than most people could, because like you said, he is not just some "cog in the wheel", but someone who is in charge of many like-minded people who belive in him.
Wow this feels tailor made for people like me. I want to do further studies in deep learning after I graduate, but I'm not really keen on spending 4/5 years of my life on it. I'll be keeping an eye on this....
What I learnt on 1v1 was that you should keep travelling towards the opposite corner of the map, forming one or two very thin attack lines, to surprise them in the beginning itself.
Sometimes I used the first, weaker one as a recon team, so that they give me the king's location before they are slaughtered, and then the second, stronger one comes in from an altogether different route and finishes them.
I'd read a few articles from your blog some time ago and I must say I really liked it! Especially those about automata and Turing Machines. I'll definitely consider buying your book!
Where did you get that notion? At least among people working in the tech sector, it is widely believed that we will achieve AGI one day, and that too with the the help of Turing machines. Except for Roger Penrose's argument against this, I haven't seen any opposition to this belief yet.
Usually people begin by contributing to projects which they already use. For a beginner, it might be better to start contributing to a project which is mainly written in the language which they're familiar with. Also, try to find a project which is beginner friendly; they usually have some issues marked as 'beginner' or 'good first bug', and also have a CONTRIBUTING.md page.
Bonus: A good idea is to start contributing to a project which contain problems sets to be solved by coding the solutions in a particular language. You could send PRs for creating/implementing some problems. http://exercism.io/ is a good example.
Same here. Except I use 'myfork' as the name for my remote repo. Origin/upstream always got me confused when I first started learning Git, so I created my own naming conventions.
If I'm right, one of the advantages of this move is that llvm will finally switch over to using Git as its main version control system, and get rid of svn altogether.