The median is slightly more meaningful, as you are assured there is at least one sample in your set having that exact value,

They spent around $24.5M on tickets (assuming they were able to keep the 5% sales commission), took home $57.8M (the lump-sum payout of the $95M pool).

If one other person had won each winner would take home $28.9M, still a small net profit.

In college we explored replication the GPS algorithm, your final calculation would always give you two position fixes -- one in space, the other within the earth's atmosphere. Your algorithm would discard the orbital result and return the second answer.

Scratch that, reverse it, and you've got your answer for a lunar fix /s

The reason your self-constructed strawman suggests is just your personal biases showing, not the NRA's. Rather Castile's case and Biden's had one thing in common -- the person at the center of the case was a drug user. Also the NRA rarely has much to say about law enforcement shootings, regardless of the ethnicity of the victim

OTOH, " the 2A crowd" (which is a lot larger than the NRA) did actually have quite a bit to say about Castile and about Hunter, yet were mostly ignored by the major media.

Just get rid of the penny!

I wouldn't call that either compiling or interpreting. That's front-end lexical analysis and parsing, which for BASIC was not exactly a conventional parse tree, but close. It remained in memory, and that's what was read when you typed RUN. I'd have to fire up my old Apple ][ to be able to tell you for certain what the on-disk format of a saved BASIC program looked like, but it was probably stored in some hybrid of the tokenized format plus the REM comments. (I probably knew the answer to that 45 years ago.)

It wouldn't surprise me if they had considered compiling that tokenized data down to the same UCSD P-code that the Pascal system used, but AFAIK, neither of Apple's BASICs were ever ported to the p-System, although there was a different BASIC from UCSD that was available.

When I worked in the HP-UX file systems group, we had Hans Reiser come in for a day and talk about possibly including ReiserFS with HP/UX, either instead of, or in addition to, VxFS from Veritas. IIRC, this was about a year before he got in trouble and we realized just who we had been dealing with.

Our impression at the time was that he was no more eccentric than any of the other super-geniuses who worked with us at HP or who had built better mousetraps on the outside. We were hoping to swing a deal like we had with Veritas, where we got the VxFS code in source form, built it into HP-UX, and distributed it for free with the OS instead of as an extra cost add-on like it was with Solaris. In return, we received late-beta quality code, tested the bejesus out of it, fixed most of the bugs we found ourselves, then sent the fixes back to Veritas, where they could do whatever they wanted with them, which was to integrate them back into their code base nearly 100% of the time. Part of why this worked was because Veritas and our organization were physically located relatively close to each other, so face-to-face communication was easy and frequent.

We decided not to proceed with Reiser, not because he was a nutjob (which we had no way of knowing about), but because he wanted too much money, did not want to share the source, and because his core developers were in Russia and other countries and were contractors instead of employees, so they could disappear at any time. For someone who was going to be a critical third-party contributor, it looked too brittle for comfort.

Not impossible, especially in an OS environment (either monolithic kernel or microkernel and separate FS code) with well-thought-out VFS and I/O layers, but yes, very difficult. Even writing one from scratch and putting huge resources towards every known type of testing may still leave in some bug that doesn't manifest in the field for years or decades. It's especially frustrating when you're trying to hit the sweet spot of the fastest-but-most-expensive versus slow-but-cheap-and-reliable, like bcachefs does.

It's all about viewpoint and use case. I use ZFS in my NAS that's running FreeBSD-based TrueNAS, and it's a beautiful thing that I turn on and it Just Works. But if I were developing something that needed the capabilities of both Linux and ZFS, it's not clear whether ZFS and the hoops I'd have to jump through would be more work or less than an alternative like btrfs/bcachefs/etc.

Which also raises the question: Why don't we all just call it ECMAscript? Has the trademarked thing whose source files end in .js diverged from ECMAscript enough to consider them two different things?

In some fields a master's is useful, like CS, where it indicates high level engineer versus a PhD which indicates a focus on pure research. In others, like chemistry, a master's is an afterthought, and a PhD is the only thing that matters.

Definitely the right thing to do, but they may not be permitted to if the product uses proprietary third-party code, e.g., using a Wind River-derived OS that Just Works instead of porting something to whatever SOC they use.

The "free" coffee at my former Fortune-500's office kept declining in quality, at one point our jump server had "ping" aliased to set a payload of 4BAD0FF1CEC0FFEE.

It was almost a relief when they stopped providing free coffee on each floor, instead of taking a 1 minute detour to pour a cup, the whole team would troop down to buy some actually good coffee across the street at Intelligentsia, where sometimes we'd get to chatting with the competition...

For something emergent want to fix right now, like the monthly screeching EAS tones on the radio or closing off the 3-days-dead skunk smell coming in from the "fresh" air vents, I vastly prefer a physical button.

Nothing stops the automaker from also offering voice control as an option, but there are some controls which it just makes sense to have direct hotbutton access.

You're so right about executives. Not only are they worried about this quarter's results above all else, they tend to be nontechnical, sometimes even the CTO. Unless they're smart (and humble) enough to listen to the people they hired to actually know and do this stuff, they're always going to be vulnerable to one-size-fits-all-and-cures-all "solutions" sold using slide decks full of buzzwords like "zero trust". (Yet the company is supposed to put 100% trust in the vendor!)