They only need to go after the big fish. Should they succeed vs one of the biggest companies, the rest will rapidly realise that picking a fight will end badly and adjust their behaviour. It's a sensible strategy.

Culham isn't closed. JET, one of the two fusion reactors hosted on site, has been shutdown. MAST-U is still active.

Glad Europe is pushing against this unwise trend.

I'm going to leave these here:

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.europarl.europa.eu...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.europarl.europa.eu...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.citizensinformatio...

Just in case anyone want to actually know how EU lawmaking and the parliament works. Rather than reading the load of nonsense I'm replying to. The MEPs of the EU parliament work with the commission to draft law, it isn't done in isolation. The Commission is simply responsible for the process. MEPs have the power to dismiss the Commission, so ultimately the buck stops with the EU Parliament.

...an "Oh Fuck" of black holes.

It seems you don't understand the difference between a mathematical construct that can hold and process information and the information stored within it. Neural networks are a mathematical approximation to biological neural systems, an extraction of the fundamental mathematical behaviour, without the biologically imperfect representation of those rules. True, some of the current networks miss certain functions, however they can approximate them. This was been mathematically proven back in the 80s (though practically it is inefficient).

The first step in mirroring true intelligent AI is the development of the fundamental mathematical construct, the second is identifying how to assemble the elements of that construct into increasingly complex and capable systems. We are at the early stages of the 2nd part of this process. It is very primitive AI.

Declaring that you think processing a 3D model's vertices is in any way equivalent to processing a neural model just because they require the same mathematical operation at some a point in the calculation really demonstrates a lack of understanding of maths, modelling and the relevant domains.

I'm not seeing any real insight in your posts, just a massive chip on your shoulder. There is no benefit engaging with your further.

Well I have witnessed the process of EU legislation directly as a member of both research and political organisations (including interacting directly with an EU commissioner and MEPs). With all due respect, you clearly have no first hand knowledge of the process and the interactions involved.

I hope you enjoyed beating up your strawman "remoaner" in lieu of actually having a reasoned argument. It is pretty evident you also don't completely understand the principle of democratic representation and I suggest you take a look at how governments work around the world (in detail).

I can sum up your comment as reading the letter of a process, without actually understanding it.

MEPs work with the commission to develop laws. While the commission is the only body with legal power to hand the piece of paper over to trigger the voting process, it does not in any way preclude MEPs being involved in the drafting process. This should be obvious on a practical level - there would be little chance of any law passing if the commission didn't work directly with MEPs to ensure the legislation was palatable to them and their respective constituents. Calling them rubber stampers is extraordinarily naive.

I'm repeatedly shocked how removed from reality your understanding is. Perhaps go and talk to an MEP for 5 minutes (if in the UK: not a UKIP one, they deliberately didn't engage in the process to undermine the EU for their own ends e.g. Farage never turning up to the Fisheries meeting to support the UK fishing community).

Raise a PEP suggesting it.

Indeed, OOP is a tool in the toolbox of representations. Pick the best for the particular problem. I tend to find developers who object to OOP tend to be pretty poor performers when it comes to architectural design, unable to clearly identify common structures and relationships underpinning elements of the system they are modelling.

It is a surprisingly good question to be able to determine someone's reasoning skills when expanded. It provides a good discussion for teasing out ecosystem knowledge, working with others, their understanding of how humans parse information and fundamental understanding of information and redundancy.

A problem that literally doesn't exist with indentation delimiting as there are no braces...! Spend a few minutes and think it through properly.

Assume a developer is using good practice and indenting code to show scope for readability

* indentation is now performing exactly the same purpose as the braces, there is redundant information
* braces don't add to readability relative to indentation, so why have the braces at all
* there is no difference to a compiler/interpreter parser front end of using braces or indentation to delimit scope

As I said lower down. Indentation and braces are just to different ways of representing exactly the same logic. Any criticism you apply to whitespace in terms of the computer parsing the code applies equally to braces and vice-versa. The difference is the human layer, the presentation. The only valid complaint is "I don't like typing spaces", but then you'd be a poor team C/C++ etc... coder too. The braces add NOTHING if you already cleanly indent code as the intent can be entirely inferred from the indentation.

If you are already writing good code, it is indented. The braces are then simply a waste of characters.

Missing a brace can't be solved by your IDE any better than missing whitespace. There is no behavioural difference as far as the parser is concerned between " CODE\nCODE" and "{CODE}CODE", it is just a different delimitation scheme. You could write a short segment of code to convert one into the other.

Once you drill down into the topic you find that the real reason people don't like using spaces or tabs is simply because they get burned using an editor without auto indentation and think using spaces is tedious. Anyone incapable or resistant to using modern IDE doesn't get hired, end of. We are not wasting money on them.

Of course we expect documentation, testing and conformance to coding guidelines, I didn't mention them in my post, but hope you enjoyed beating up your strawman.