Size and pixel density concerns aside, one downside of larger monitors is the power draw. This burns 64W, which adds £3 to your monthly electricity bill if used for 8hrs every weekday. It's not a terrible amount, but I can run 3 micro pc servers 24/7 for that cost.
Based on the article, it looks like a poor man's decent option is a 1440p monitor at 60Hz that is running at 1:1 scaling.
Benefits:
* Cheap-ish
* Reasonable resolution with crisp text
* Small difference between 60 and 120Hz
Drawbacks:
* If you want crisp text and reasonable real estate, forget any other resolution than 1440p. It just won't align with the physical pixels and will look horrible.
I'd love to get a 4k monitor at some point, at least that would give me the scaling option in MacOS (1440p doesn't), but if I want really crisp text I have to render the equivalent of 1080, which isn't that much real estate for something like IntelliJ.
Yes, dynamic programming as mentioned. Good point about the stable states being sparse, meaning we wouldn't be able to get close enough to a good representation of the image.
I'd be curious to see code that generates an initial state that when running indefinitely can create a stable state which looks as much as possible like a given image.
That would basically be the "living" representation of the image, as far as game of life rules go.
My argument is that -as a society- we don't really accept that women are facing tons of difficulties that men don't experience, because of their sex.
For example, sometimes it's because they might choose to have a baby in the future and a lot of employers don't want to have that risk, so they avoid hiring women after say 25.
I'm not saying that you're sexist, I'm saying that as a society we're comfortable saying that people who have less deserve it for some reason and we have more for just reasons.
If we accept that the society is unfair, and part of why we're better off than others is either luck of because the game is rigged (ie rich parents), we'll be more generous and fair.
Apologies if I insulted people, I was trying to make a point for generosity and I got carried away.
So as a gender, women choose lower paid jobs and work less?
If this is true and it is a choice, that would mean that women as a gender are either lazy or less qualified.
If this is not true then it is evidence of inequality in the selection of employees.
I don't see either of the above making your point.
How do we have equal opportunity? Can you point me towards evidence of this?
I guess you're not arguing about the gender wage gap, as it's a well documented fact. What is the point you're trying to make?
That's a common argument to justify inequality.
If learning is the key, then why is there such a huge income disparity between men and women? Are women lazy and don't learn?
I agree that you can roll your own store. You'll miss lot of free functionality and the dev tools, but maybe it's not stuff you need.
I also agree that introducing a dependency at every opportunity comes with serious drawbacks.
Every situation is unique of course. In my case:
At work, I value code that is more standardised so that I get less bugs, documentation / best patterns and crucially easier on-boarding process.
For a personal project, I would definitely consider rolling out my own implementation, even just for the learning it comes with.
Trying new features is a good way to broaden your skill set, and if there is something you strongly dislike about the usability of a feature you can even provide feedback to the JDK developers.
To me it reads like: Try our experimental features because that will make you a better (rounded | paid) developer, and if you really really want you may even provide feedback.