Functional Programming Theory: 500 pages of lambda calculus and endofunctors
Functional Programming Practice: Quicksort
ImplyingImplications
joined 1 year ago
if this.time_of_year and this.time_of_day and this.part_of_country and this.location == 'kitchen':
is_viewable = False
It's the same outcome either way. You don't have nukes and another country decides to nuke you? Your country doesn't exist anymore! You do have nukes and another country decides to nukes you? Your country doesn't exist anymore! What changes?
People say deterrence, but what is the deterrence? You built something that you'll never use? What's the point?? Oh you will use it? Great! You've decided there's some event that is so bad you'd end the world if it happened. I'm not sure what event that is. Maybe you have one in mind? China attacks India? The world should surely be destroyed then! No? Too bad! You don't get a say! China and India decide if humanity gets to continue! They definitely wouldn't do that though.
They built their nukes to never use them. Which is the same as not having nukes, but having nukes is required so that nobody uses them, which is the same as never building them, but they need to be built so they won't be used!
No. Nuclear weapons should not exist.
Kurzgesagt recently made a video on the nuclear arms race. The end of the race was when the guy who invented the hydrogen bomb invented a bomb that could destroy the entire planet. The bomb wouldn't even need to be dropped onto your enemy. It could be built inside your own country and detonated any time at all to end humanity. He thought of it as the biggest deterrent to war. Nobody else did. Politicians and military leaders threw out the idea entirely. Why would anyone detonate a nuclear bomb inside their own country??
The size of that bomb pales in comparison to the size of all nuclear weapons in existence today. We built that bomb. It's just not one giant bomb, but split into 12,000 parts and spread over the world. Is it any different? If you cannot justify building a nuclear weapon that would destroy your own country to destroy another, how can you justify building any nuclear weapons at all?
That TLS handshake went hard
some mf named like cum-sock
Excuse me? My family BUILT this country!
The wiki page on leading and lagging current might as well be "demons and shit". Practical Engineering talks a bit about it in this video on power grids.
This made me curious as to how many different legal systems there were. This wiki page has a global map of systems. Surprisingly, there isn’t a lot of variety. Most legal systems tend to be based on legislation (called civil law, originating in Rome), court rulings (called common law, originating in Britain), religious texts (called canon for christian, sharia for muslim, and halakha for jewish), or some mixture of those.
How are they still in business? Every single farmer, bar none, has to know about their business practices
Wendover Productions has a decent video on John Deere's market dominance. tl;dw It's by cutthroat capitalism of course.
John Deere has bought out all their competitors and continues to do so. Every single breakthrough in farming equipment technology in the last decade is owned by John Deere. As a farmer, you either choose to sign a one-sided contract with John Deere or you use outdated inefficient equipment that John Deere hasn't purchased the patent rights to. Or, of course, you sell your farm all together. Large corporate farms don't care much about the John Deere contract since they have the power to negotiate a better deal. A lot of small farmers have been making the choice to sell out.
Soon, all farming will be done by one megacorp, buying their seed from Monsanto, using John Deere equipment, and cashing in a ridiculously fat subsidy cheque from the government.
Bags of sand
view more: next ›
Mike Tyson once said "Social media made y'all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it." There are things people would only say behind a keyboard.
It can be hard not to get upset over mean comments but I try to remember I have hundreds of pleasant Interactions with people daily and I shouldn't put so much weight on the few negative interactions with random internet people.