Serious answer: the so-called 'right to be forgotten' is really a 'right to force others to delete true statements,' which is to say, to cause them to lie by omission. It is an infringement upon those others' right to free speech. It's fundamentally stupid: no-one has a right compel government violence in order to muzzle others.
If it's a PhD in something like "Whiteness studies" or in multitude of similarly useful subjects, then gainful employment as a barista is a happy ending really.
What this article ignores is that intelligence is at least 60% inheritable, and elite professionals are likely to merry other elite professionals. So wealth factor is not the only factor in this situation.
There is probably an ongoing process of genetic fitness based stratification of the society. At least to a certain degree.
>He, like Thomas, would not follow the risen Christ unless he saw him himself
An extraordinary statement without evidence. People today have all kinds of beliefs without evidence. People also could lie, be pressured into belief by conformity, have hallucinations, etc. Not to mention people 2000 years ago didn't have todays strict standards delineating fact from beliefs.
There are numerous contradictions and discrepancies in these "accounts". The historicity of Jesus' resurrection is very much in doubt by the preeminent new testament scholars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHJE7cetkB4#t=81
And indeed the historical method can't be seriously compared to the scientific method, because it is vulnerable to errors in the accounts, falsification, forgery, intentional lying, biased interpretation. While science relies on repeatability.
The Final boss fight was a little unintuitive for me. I thought it was completely a puzzle or a memory task, because you can't damage him right away. So I repeated his patterns with increasing difficulty, up to six beeps I think, waiting for him to implode from his anger. The fact that you need to shoot him while he's in the angry state wasn't obvious to me.
Making Cairo C API a C++ standard, through automatic conversion, looks all kinds of wrong to me. The result is not properly generified like Boost GIL, and it carries vaguely defined implementation details like for example font hinting style from freetype (not even cairo library itself). I hope this and the ABI proposal will never make it as the C++ TS or standard.
Could you please list literature/papers that you found especially useful while making that renderer? I plan to do the same thing for education purposes.
Please let me know if you have any questions, (see my email at http://jonathan-olson.com/about), and please feel free to use my code however you like (things I wrote are MIT, but I use CC-by and CC-by-non-commercial HDR images).
If you're interested in ray/path tracing or photorealistic rendering at all I would seriously recommend Physically Based Rendering[1]. It's probably one of the most satisfying book purchases I've made. The authors go through every aspect of implementing a quality path tracer: image sampling, surface shading models, statistics and integration methods, intersection testing and acceleration and more. It's an absolute treasure trove of information. (Be prepared to do a lot of math.)
There are silent corruption bugs in storage drivers for example. Having that kind of competency in-house is too expensive for most companies.(Not Spotify in this case, but problem could be much harder to fix)
That is the description of a hardware problem that the vendor they bought the hardware from was unable to resolve due to an unsupported OS.
That is where picking the right hardware vendor comes in. I wouldn't ask my OS vendor to support my hardware choices unless they specifically certified it. Neither Debian or Ubuntu certified that raid card...which puts you back to square 1 again, rendering their support moot.
