You seem to be unaware of Ludum dare and similar challenges where (literally) thousands of games are created over the weekend that could easily compete with games made in the 80's.
Skill is still here, it is just muted by the modern media. Back then a any game release was huge news, today such games are made all the time every day and don't even get noticed.
I really don't know why you take what was an entirely positive comment, in praise of programming and programmers in the early 80s, and try to turn it into a negative, pointless, opinion-based pissing contest about which era was 'better'.
If the early 80's was good, then something else must be bad. Perhaps you meant it was good compared to what happened before, or compared to what it would have been if people didn't make games. But a reasonable guess is good compared to today, which is an implicitly negative comment about today's programmers. I think the reply was quite reasonable - it doesn't make sense to glorify the past when the present has massively more of what was good about the past.
> If the early 80's was good, then something else must be bad.
If programming from one era was good, why do you think that means programming from another era "must be bad"? Why can't good programming exist in both eras?
> But a reasonable guess is good compared to today
If you insist on guessing there's more to my final sentence, why isn't a reasonable guess, "as well as non-amazing programming back then" or "just as there is amazing programming today"?
First, most hackathon games are terrible. They don't even rise to the level of coherence of those former games, because they're mostly thrown together into the first vaguely "game-like" thing that compiles, with half the gameplay in orders of magnitude more space.
Second, those games are only possible due to the existence of frameworks, high-level languages and the proliferation of programming knowledge over the internet. Almost no one doing a weekend hackathon is cranking out a playable game in raw assembly.
Now to be fair, most games in the 80s were terrible as well - that's part of what led to the crash, and it's just Sturgeon's Law in effect. But what's being praised here isn't really design skill so much as a level of programming skill which simply isn't strictly necessary in the modern day to create a game.
As mentioned by maintainers in the thread there is already a flag to catch unsigned overflows. They even mentioned a way to catch those overflows in the code.
I can't seem to find that flag. Only ftrapv for signed, but none for unsigned. Do you know what flag is it exactly?
That place should be relaxing and should feel like home, because it is. Keeping different levels of authority separated in different houses would be mandatory. Additionally workers living in the same house shouldn't be working on the same project[0] , even if that sounds counter-intuitive. The reason is that it diminishes possible conflicts, because in the case of unsolved argument, there is nowhere you can go, and humans can't always solve them.
Slightly off topic, but it really isn't hard to find partitions. Just run the various software to scan and that's it. I've done it at least twice when accidentally erasing a windows partition (once with fdisk when I misread the output, and at that time I didn't even know what a partition is).
Do you think they choose to ask Apple to do this in such a public way, because they are very confident the phone will contain information that will help with the investigation, which will make a positive precedent about this method for future requests, and also provide 'lobbying power' when new laws will be considered?
The iPhone in question was his (government) work phone and they already found a bunch of their other 'burner' phones in a trash bin, which they got access to. I find it unlikely he used his work phone for planning when they purposefully ditched other devices. Additionally, I doubt he knew the iPhone encryption would block investigators from accessing the data, so the fact they can't access it is most likely just coincidental that the device's battery was dead.
But this is just speculation...
I'm definitely in the camp that believes this is a legal stunt by the FBI to set a precedent using a highly publicized terrorism case which the public will support. A previous All Writs Act claim in 2014 by the FBI for a credit card fraud case involving an encrypted iPhone didn't change Apple's position on the matter, so they are trying again with a higher stakes case.
They can be confident because they are free to assert whatever they want about the contents of the phone. Nobody will have access to information that contradicts their assertions.
The phone might not even have to contain anything useful for it to be said to have been helpful by the elimination of that avenue of research. "Apple helped by showing the phone had no information on the attack and we've moved on to other investigative avenues."
One could twist things all day long to fit a goal.
How sad it is that the can of coke is used as a comparison. It almost makes it look like a reasonable drink.
The World Health Organization has recently suggested cutting the recommended sugar intake for adults in half, to about 25 grams, around 6 teaspoons, of sugar for a normal weight adult a day.
Here is my favorite site that shows the amounts of sugar cubes in various unhealthy food: http://www.sugarstacks.com/
According to that information you can drink a half can of coke (most left one in the picture in the link) to satisfy that daily need. That implies that all other food you eat that day will not include any sugar! That is an impossible standard to reach. Solution, don't drink drinks with sugar.
I think it's the other way around; people have begun thinking of soda as problematic because of the sugar. So making it clear that a drink exceeds a coke in sugar puts the drink over in the problematic bracket.
I think that's referring to refined sugars... as a diabetic, I tend to pay more attention to glycemic load... making an effort to keep it under 40 (max) at any meal, and under 100 per day, which is hard... iirc, the sugars/day should be around or under 100g for most people, with at least half of that coming from natural, unrefined sources (fruit/veg).
Absorption is a big piece... fruit smoothies are much easier to absorb, for example than whole fruit, which contains fiber which inhibits absorption.
For the most part, if you don't get more than half your calories from any macro source (carb, protein, fat, alcohol), and have some variety to your diet, once you get enough protein to support your body, calories are calories. Some people have medical conditions that mean they should limit some sources... but that's the exception.
The issue is that people don't pay attention to these things.. or consider the calories of drinks and snacks in their daily input... if most people wrote down everything they consumed for a week, calculated the macros, and tracked their weight a couple times a day, it would be eye opening. I tend to reach for water more often than not (2-3 liters or so a day) and about 1 liters of other beverages a day.
> The World Health Organization has recently suggested cutting the recommended sugar intake for adults in half, to about 25 grams, around 6 teaspoons, of sugar for a normal weight adult a day.
The interesting thing about this sort of guideline is how quickly you exceed it with fruit. The most popular fruits are all packed with sugar: an apple has ~10 grams; a banana, ~12 grams; an orange, ~9 grams.
Since I entered the workforce a few years ago, I have gone from underweight to obese, and with no spontaneous trend-reversal in sight, I have recently decided to consciously monitor my intake. Four weeks and two negative kilos later, the most striking realization is precisely what you are saying, but viewed from two different perspectives:
A banana is about 105 kCal, 14g of sugars, 13g of complex carbs, and not much else[1]. My daily caloric budget is 19 bananas. I need 90g+ of protein a day, and I need some oil for cooking, so the discretionary budget is about a half. If I eat normally and budget the calories well, I will have about two bananas' worth of snacks which I can eat outside of my three main meals. That's the extent of my freedom. A banana is a big deal.
On the other hand, if I hypothetically only had bananas in my pantry, I would need to eat 19 of them to hit my calories (more if I didn't want to lose weight). That's not fun. It's hard work after the first five or six! In a less hypothetical situation of protein and fiber intake, I would need 400g+ of chicken breast meat and 1kg+ of kale (each being a good source of one and the other respectively). My stomach is turning just thinking that, and I really had to learn to balance my diet on many different foodstuffs.
In isolation, it can be crazy how much or how little of particular nutrient a food contains.
Skill is still here, it is just muted by the modern media. Back then a any game release was huge news, today such games are made all the time every day and don't even get noticed.