That why the solution is to only allow speculation when it's "ok". M1 is believed to have a number of Spectre-esq security mechanisms built into it to determine just that. For example: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200192673A1
Also, In dougallj's code [1] the zero of registers should be superfluous so it is assumed the function below is needed to make the experiments run stably by claiming ownership of the registers as part of a general anti-speculation security mechanism.
static int add_prep(uint32_t *ibuf, int instr_type);
The M1 explainer [2] has lot of interesting ideas like this contained inside it.
> Again, I'm not interested in an OS flamewar. That Apple's products are subpar is a fact at this point
That second sentence seems like it was specifically crafted to start a flame war to me. You don't even mention on what dimensions Apple products are subpar. All possible ones I presume?
It refers to a default install of any mainstream distribution, with few modifications. Eg you're bound to run into problems if you're running some strange window manager with a funky desktop. By comparison, I'd expect a base install with Gnome to mostly just work. Which it does with supported hardware. eg arandr(/whatever the GUI tool is) works fine for arranging monitors.
> Is the correct value for a Ponzi scheme really determined by the most recent dollar they took in?
I wouldn't say a Ponzi scheme should be valued by this dollar. It should be valued by the next dollar that someone is willing to put into it as the whole point of the Ponzi scheme is to gather the next dollar.
I think most stalls are actually shared so when your neighboring stall is occupied you'll get less power. Stations are more crowded these days so it's getting common. Anyway, it doesn't actually diminish your argument, especially as 16-pod+ supercharging stations exist.
The complex plane was introduced by Caper Wessel in a paper that was published in 1799 so it would've existed before vector notation.
My guess is by the time vectors got popular the complex notation, and theorems that people had proved which used complex notation, had already stuck. But I'm only a hack math historian so I can definitely be wrong here.
I think it's important to keep in mind that math and science, much like the code base that I am trying my hardest to avoid, is evolved.
I really enjoy looking into the history of mathematics and physics. I think it gives one a much better appreciation of why things are defined the way they are, and also the limitations of those definitions.
There is a really great book on the history of imaginary numbers. The history mostly focuses on how i was used to help solve algebra problems, so definitely one should be comfortable with high school algebra to get something from the text, but I don't think one needs much more math than that for the first half of the book. The second half gets more into how various use cases developed, in those chapters basic college level calculus would be a major plus. I read it more than 10 years ago though so no promises. :)
>> homework
> This is one issue that I'm passionate about. Research increasingly implies that homework is probably harmful in elementary; of dubious value in early middle school; and only valuable in high school and beyond.
Isn't the article about removing homework in high school?
Mr. Moreno, the Alhambra High School English teacher, specifically said he no longer gives homework. Doesn't this mean the research indicates he is removing something valuable?
It might all be semantics though.
I assume the "opportunities to improve essays and classwork" is done outside of normal class hours. Perhaps, the work is done at home. And that they addressed your point A by allowing students to resubmit work, and your point B by removing deadlines. I can definitely see how it could be an improvement.
> Isn't the article about removing homework in high school?
It seems to be broader-- speaking to school district policies that cross the entire gamut from elementary to high school-- but the focus is on high school. Certainly I'd say the case for removing homework is weakest in high school. (I only teach one HS class, and my homework load there is pretty light, too).
> I assume the "opportunities to improve essays and classwork" is done outside of normal class hours. Perhaps, the work is done at home. And that they addressed your point A by allowing students to resubmit work, and your point B by removing deadlines. I can definitely see how it could be an improvement.
I think these are very difficult things to drive as a policy from the top down. Removing deadlines just encourages students to dig themselves into a different kind of hole: an insurmountable backlog of work that makes doing any of it feel less worthwhile.
Also, In dougallj's code [1] the zero of registers should be superfluous so it is assumed the function below is needed to make the experiments run stably by claiming ownership of the registers as part of a general anti-speculation security mechanism.
static int add_prep(uint32_t *ibuf, int instr_type);
The M1 explainer [2] has lot of interesting ideas like this contained inside it.
[1] https://gist.github.com/dougallj/5bafb113492047c865c0c8cfbc9...
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28549954