You’re right. Going back to my physics example, all the variables in a physics problem are actually of the same type, float. So you’d need more specific types, but that would be infeasible-the whole point of types in a general purpose language is that they’re general enough for any use case.
This makes me wonder: what if there was a language where variable names are determined according to the type, with the option of overriding with a custom name. So a variable of type http.Request would automatically be named “req”, the next one in scope would be “req2”, etc.
If you think about it, when you solve a physics problem, for instance, you call every mass “m1”, “m2”, etc. Maybe this would be another step in Go’s direction of conforming style to make code more standard and readable.
As a graduating senior in CS who is super interested in working in BCI, may I ask how you got into the field? I would love to work somewhere like Neuralink but it seems that most of these companies are not hiring new grads (understandably, perhaps). I might just get this or openbci and do a project on my own, to start.
These laws exist. You’re not allowed to discriminate based on criminal or arrest record unless it’s relevant to the job (e.g. someone applying to be a delivery driver with 3 DUIs).
The problem is that between two equally qualified candidates, if one has a record and the other is clean, it can be pretty easy to justify just throwing the first one out. And pretty hard to prove that that’s why you were rejected.
Really? Seems like it’d be more reliable and a lot faster to just hop in one of the hundred rickshaws on every street. Besides the fact that they’ll overcharge you if you’re a tourist.
Not the OP, but as I’d say that subjectively speaking, you’re better off going to MIT, but only if you have the passion and drive to succeed at a place like that (which you probably do if you got into MIT).
But for Boston College, Boston University, or Northeastern? You’re probably going to end up paying more than MIT and get an education that’s indistinguishable from UMass, quite possibly worse in some respects.
What people have been saying in this thread is not incorrect (though should be nuanced): the ivy leagues are worth it for the caliber of the student body and reputation; otherwise, go to a (Tier 1) public school.
Unless, of course, you don’t want to and can easily afford otherwise.
Every reply to you is repeating the same thing and they’re all wrong. Woe on the next great sociologist, philosopher, or artist who gets discouraged from study because “just do CS so you can make money” or “just go to the library it’s literally the same thing as four years of training under experts in the field and discussion with other smart young people.”
My school’s JS IDE [1](“JavaScript without the bad parts”) has a history feature that is just a scrolling list of thumbnails of the code at every change. The IDE doesn’t have many features overall, but the history is actually very nice and natural and feels like it should be standard in any IDE.
Solar panels and GPUs use rare metals of which there are a finite quantity, and are also mined through the use of slave labor in some parts of the world.
They’re not really making a point that needs evidence. If you have no idea what Ethereum is, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that you take a quick look at their website before participating in an web forum discussion about it.
This is different than people blithely spouting “it’s not my job to educate you” when asked to give some support for their controversial, unsubstantiated claim.
I don’t think those first two examples should be done either. In many countries in central and Northern Europe, it’s common journalistic practice not to print the names of those accused of crimes. Innocent until proven guilty, right? I think we’ll look back at the NYT et al publishing mugshots and full names of the accused as downright barbaric.
With online learning, basically all of my exams are like this. I’ve heard of some people having proctored online exams, but luckily my school’s Math and CS departments seem to have opted to just make the questions harder/unable to be looked up, and gave up on restricting us from using notes or the internet. It’s actually surprising how well it works, if the professor can design the exam cleverly enough. Really the only way you can cheat is by colluding with other students (which admittedly is a fairly big issue) or, for some types of programming questions, by just running the code on your own machine (which again can be avoided by clever test design).