mvf0

Here is that exact documentary you were thinking of [0]. It's really a fantastic documentary on the incredible feats of von Neumann and worth a watch by everyone here.

That person you quoted was Edward Teller and the interview can be found at 54:58 [1].

I read somewhere that the young boy asking von Neumann a question at 6:13 [2] is actually Bill Clinton. Can anyone verify this?

[0] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE

[1] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE?t=3299

[2] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE?t=371

Agreed. And it's pretty obvious too. If you ever have some serious misgivings about any of these IoT privacy invasions and voice it in a comment, a deluge of comments scolding you for being a Luddite start appearing within seconds.

Apparently a majority of HN doesn't know what CS is.

Computer science isn't software engineering.

Computer science isn't coding.

They learned a 'big word' and they use it to feel smart. It's like the time Peter Griffin learned the phrase 'shallow and pedantic'.

https://youtu.be/yetwdpsiM8Q

Your analysis is incorrect.

'southpaw' is a boxing term that refers to left-handed boxers. It is in no way derogatory and did not originate with baseball [1]. In fact, it is more of a compliment because southpaws have a strategic and tactical advantage over right-handers due to stance.

'paw' as in hand

'south' as in 'not usual'

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southpaw_stance

If the guy that replaced him was that much better than him, that that person should be treated like a first class citizen. Right now H-1B workers are treated like indentured servants and labor abuse is rampant.

Thank you for confirming this. These kind of errors drive me crazy when I try to work through proofs on my own.

I would argue that there are rabbit holes in Haskell that can lead to baroque terrors of syntax on par with the C++ horrors in the article. The difference between Haskell and C++ is that Haskell code always has a well defined meaning even if it is _insanely_ terse. There is no ambiguity like with C++.

Top Clinton aide Doug Band signals his concern over Bill Clinton's conflicts of interest

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/21978

“I signed a conflict of interest policy as a board member of cgi ... Oddly, wjc does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc.”

Do you think conflicts of interest at the highest peaks of federal government are "benign" and "hardly criminal"? This is just one example of really shady stuff revealed in the leaks. IMO the Clinton Foundation sells political influence and that's illegal.

Your head is in the sand if you think risotto is the only thing revealed by the Podesta leaks.

"The overall parameters (area surveyed, sensitivity, etc.) of the RATAN search are not reported by Bursov et al. ..."

I find this incredible. They rushed to get credit for an ET candidate but didn't even bother to mention the details needed for others to be able to verify. Great work by the Berkeley people. Skepticism is healthy and vital to science.

Your problem is that you don't seem to have sufficient understanding of the concept of limits.

I could write a node server that converts all that fixed length ASCII data into JSON faster than you guys can complain.