Pointers aren't required for most purposes. They're often just an optimization, frequently a questionable optimization. It's true that C pretty much requires pointers, but in C++ references can generally be substituted with greater clarity. Pointers are almost never used in Java (are they ever?), and certainly not in Python. Or many other languages I could name. (Yeah, they still exist "under the hood", but that's not the point of an exam of early or intermediate programming skill.) For that matter check out D https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdlang.org%2F . That's a language that would be my favorite if they had a better way to document your code (last I checked Doxygen didn't do a good job) and it it had a slightly better library. (As it is I currently prefer C++ except for stuff that's heavy in unicode, where I'll switch to Python.)

C is actually easier than Java, though doing anything complex is harder.

A C++ subset doesn't have to be any harder than Java, and can be at least as capable. (The problem would be documenting it...and for students, learning to use only the subset.)

Really? AFAIK it was a joke phrase some individual came up with to gently mock the idea of "coding" without actually knowing what you're doing... and then (some) people somehow went ahead and adopted it as a serious idea anyway. (I wish those people luck, they are going to need it)

Stopping distance for a fully loaded semi at 55 miles per hour is 133 yards. If you step out in front of that truck 15 yards ahead, there's nothing the truck can do about it -- well, it could try to swerve, but it's anyone guess whether that would help or just makes things worse.

I'd go a little further, and say that any single sensor technology alone is inadequate, due to the amount of damage that occur after an unmitigated sensor failure. Multiple sensor technologies should be active at once, so that if (when!) any one type of sensor gets fooled, the others can override it and nobody dies.

My friend's cousin got rear-ended by a semi truck that didn't see the red light at the end of the off-ramp, or the car that was stopped at it. He was instantly killed, his car was crushed like a can.

It turned out the semi's driver had been on the road for 14 hours straight, and was not, shall we say, in a fully lucid state.

Would a self-driving truck have avoided this death? It's hard to say for sure, but we can probably at least say that its cognitive abilities wouldn't degrade over the course of a long day, due to lack of sleep.

here I thought it was how you got 40 ft tall wasps.

What's the storage *density*? I have the impression that grid scale batteries often use (relatively) low density storage, so they take up a lot of space. Lithium batteries are relatively high density (lots of storage/volume). Dense storage is, of course, part of what makes them so dangerous when they catch fire.

Perhaps it you wanted this to last through a blackout you'd need to give up your basement, rather than just part of it as with lithium batteries.

Unnh....there must be a reason Japan was researching whether uranium could profitably extracted from sea water. I believe that it was because decent ores for uranium were becoming scarce. (I used to know whether that was the reason they gave, but I can't certainly remember any longer....I think that was it though.)

Whatever would we do?!?!

Seems like a human problem too. If AI could do a chunk of the work, and you had humans verifying, you would need fewer humans - hence vulnerability

So where does the news come from without reporters? Will all "news" just become rehashed PR statements and AI hallucinations?

AI needs input. Without reporters, there is no input for real news.

Today.

What the IRS chief appears to be saying is that there will be more audits, which implies more audits for people with lower incomes. In other words: many ordinary Trump voters.

Annoyingly, the UK won't allow you to file electronically if you are non-resident.