|
N_tro_P wrote: You are hillarious. FYI, I worked in the aerospace industry. You are being quite arrogant and naive. Planes that haul people today can fly themselves, yet you seem to think a toy should behave more erratic
As a janitor or as a door guard? Being a troll certainly just is your hobby.
And please don't complain about being harassed by a troll again, you two would be perfect roommates.
Go climb a tree.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And which part of 'f*** off' did you not understand? I must have overlooked the memo where they announced that every self important dickhead can now come and blurp out phrases in such a tone. Just get lost before you succeed in making me angry.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
modified 6-Jun-17 14:15pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impressive!
Expensive, but impressive!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Expensive?
That's only because you're thinking as a private person.
A saved soldier is worth so much more.
I saw one of those once, they are pretty quiet but also quite autonomous.
You don't steer them, you just tell them what you want to see. CDP would be so dissapointed. 
|
|
|
|
|
Everything sold to the military is either overpriced, or defective ... I think it's a law of nature. 
overpriced military items - Google Search[^]
But I also suspect corruption and price gouging most of the time. 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: But I also suspect corruption and price gouging most of the time.
Speaking as a person who has worked in that environment, I can verify that claim. I've seen so much government waste. I was on a development team that wrote a very sophisticated piece of software that tracked, identified, and shipped replacement parts for the military using condition based maintenance. Millions was spent and got shelved due to political affiliations.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's why they got that "public" in films... that way anyone saying it happens will be taken as a fool
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a feeling the the US has forgotten the concept of a High Low Mix.
You should rather look at what Israel is doing at the moment, they have been at the forefront of drone design for decades.
I read about their concept drone swarms for SEAD purposes.
Several types of drones get air launched from airplanes at a safe(ish) distance where they are specifically designed to take out an S-400 system by simply overwhelming it.
Also rises the question when it stops being a drone and starts being a missile.
|
|
|
|
|
The Israeli Apache Attack Helicopter has a set of small drones that fly with the aircraft as a targeting and firing solution. The U.S. would sell the base model aircraft to them and they would refit the aircraft with the drone system. If the aircraft needs any base refit, the Israeli military will strip the drone system and send the aircraft back.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you ever read the small print?
Quote: xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing.
So you want to shoot them down, huh? Be careful not to kiss a rotor with a 5-15 kW motor behind it when you are successful.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
I signed up recently on codility where programmers can learn writing algorithms and companies are use it to evaluate candidates for position, what i observed is that for normal inputs my solution always passes, but for very large input my code does not returns result within the time bounds they require, i wanted to know from what source we can learn our algorithm writing skills so that they return the result in the acceptable execution time. or what can be the approaches for that?
modified 5-Jun-17 13:47pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Wikipedia (casual browsing is great so you can later recall that something is a solved problem, saving lots of effort that would have gone into reinventing algorithms for it) and Competitive Programming sites that do tutorials, TopCoder is pretty good.
Bottom-up dynamic programming probably deserves additional practice, not because it's that hard (it isn't) but because it's so broadly applicable even to many problems that aren't well-known solved problems. It also unifies a lot of named algorithms that turn out to be nothing more than applications of DP.
Works for me anyway. Some people read actual books, I've only read TAOCP 4A.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your valuable feedback, so your recommendation is to read the book and solve problems on topcoder, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm,
They are probably looking to sell whatever you create on their website/service.
Terms for companies - Codility[^]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
14. We are the owner or licensee of all intellectual property rights ("IP Rights") in the Service and in any material written or published on it. All such rights are reserved.
You must not use any content on the Site for any purpose not permitted by these Terms of Service and you must not copy, modify, re-format, frame, resell or abuse any part of the Service.
You agree to transfer to us all IP Rights in any content (including test cases and source code) you enter into the Service and you are responsible for any claims that arise due to the fact that you use the Service insofar as the claim relates to the Service (or any part of it) infringing any proprietary right (for example copyright). You are responsible for ensuring that you have the rights or permission needed to comply with these Terms of Service.
Any code entered into the Service by you may be stored and used by us in any way for the purpose of assessment, anti-cheating measures, demonstrating to third parties, and analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
Good catch. That really doesn't seem right. Most sites allow you to own the content you created.
|
|
|
|
|
What you are talking about is explained quite well :
Big O Notation
Big O notation uses a function to describe how the algorithm's worst-case performance relates to the problem size as the size grows very large. (This is sometimes called the program's asymptotic performance.)
Rod Stephens, the author, shows example algorithms in relation to how they are affected by problem set size and explains how to talk about them using Big O notation. It's the clearest explanation I've seen of this. You can read more of the sample from the book at the amazon link.
|
|
|
|
|
Was the temp where I was yesterday afternoon. Hot does not to begin to describe it. (44.4C for those less edumacated).
OTOH, I got close to 300 miles from half a tank using cruise control and a reasonable speed on clear freeways. The range was up at 475 miles at 11:17 and the temp was a cool 98F. 
|
|
|
|
|
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote: I got close to 300 miles from half a tank
The question is: how big is the tank? 
I was surprised when I bought my current car (a second hand Mercedes A180): I got nearly 60 mpg at mostly 70 mph on the drive home: 287 miles and well under half a tank (53 litres capacity).
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It's a VW - seems far less thirsty than my last car. Don't get anything like that mileage in and around town - this was freeway driving on straight flat roads with little traffic.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm impressed with the Baby Benz - it's my second A-Class and it's far, far less thirsty than the previous. The previous was a series 1 1.6l petrol, and this is a series 2 2.0l turbo diesel. From 35mpg average in the old one to averaging over 50 on mostly slow, short trips is a revelation! (And it's a much nicer car to drive as well!)
And I thought the old was was pretty efficient when I got it, because the car it replaced did 20mpg ...  (a Mitsubishi Shogun 4x4)
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I got nearly 60 mpg at ...
To be fair I take it that's UK gallons, not those colonial knock-offs.
Sin tack
the any key okay
|
|
|
|
|
Real gallons, yes.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
