they have no doubt been doing it, they're just using the panic of a brainwashed population thinking they're on the brink of Islamic revolution to normalize it
Software on consumers' devices that records ads seen and file complaints if consumers are still being tracked? It's very easy to detect algorithmically that you're being shown personalized ads.
This should be open-sourced so that the probability of creating a dangerous true AI is lower. I fear there may be something very wrong in this but I'd love a DIY grow-your-brain kit with a USB interface to experiment with. This machine would have an awesome "hello, world" program.
I'm not sure what you mean by open sourcing. There are published procedures in open access journals for creating neural organelles from tissue samples.
It is interesting to think about how organelles might develop around a mesh of stimulating wires in a computer interface.
Using cells from non-primate animals (e.g. rats) might alleviate some ethical hurdles. Still, I am somewhat uncomfortable with the thought of the idea of creating boxes of neurons trained via a interfacing mesh to accomplish certain types of computations, etc. The hard problem looms.
Currently neural organelles are being used to study disorders like autism in humans where taking brain samples is unethical, but taking a blood sample and coaxing them into neurons, is not.
I was gonna comment the same, so thanks for getting all the downvotes :)I think it's not that sexist but at first I was shocked. Now I think it is just using way too many stereotypes in one sentence. I think they realized it was sexist but thought "but we're the BBC, they will know we don't mean it like that" (which is probably true).
As a developer I don't estimate work based on number of lines I expect to write, so while this metric is interesting I do not think it explains why we miss deadlines. It does indeed show that things usually are more complicated than we think. But with that knowledge, I'm pretty sure I'll keep missing deadlines.
It's not possible to say this on the internet without being rude so, apologies, but, why code like that? It genuinely was a struggle to parse (in my brain) your oneliner of code there. If I found this in our code base it would be a huge waste of time and energy.
I said I like to write it this way, not that I always do it.
> why code like that
It's a fun exercise.
> it would be a huge waste of time and energy
I don't fully agree on this: from the name and signature it's pretty clear what the function does, so you don't need to waste time "parsing" the details. And with unit tests it is also very low-risk.
But that's speculative, in a real project I'd just use lodash.
In production code, if I ever have clever one-liners, they're usually offset with just as many additional lines of comments to explain what it's doing and why it works. Plus, this function is generic and would probably be extracted into a utility module, anyway.
To your point, though, this one is pretty esoteric.
the trend of style over readability. google recommends avoiding list comprehensions in python yet 99% of stackoverflow python questions have some convoluted list comprehension answer
I wouldn't be so quick to write that off as a performance concern. Creating tons of unnecessary objects is JavaScript's equivalent to programming without regard for cache locality at a lower level, due to the way the JITs work.
