Anglicisms in French is actually a funny subject. According to different sources, roughly 45% of all English words have a French origin. Thus, there's a lot of overlap between English and French. Some words, such as camping, parking and flirting are considered anglicisms in French, but they are actually words from the Old French that did a full round-trip from French to English to French.
Although the stems are ok and related to other French words (camping -> camp, campement, camper ; parking -> parc, parquer ; flirting <-> conter fleurette), I think what can shock the purists is this ending is -ing which does not sound French at all and is not grammatically French.
You are completely right. Speaking French is actually more than a different set of words, a different grammar and an accent (it probably applies to a lot of other languages). It's also a different mindset. We tend to use a lot of words and expressions to say something that can be summed up in one word in English. Moreover, French people like to speak with images instead of words. So, a word-for-word translation from French to English, which is what most of us do, results in confusing sentences that are hard to follow. Even if I'm a native French speaker, I always have a hard time trying to understand my fellow Frenchies speaking English, but I might be biased...
Sadly, I don't think we will witness a working implementation of Hornet anytime soon. Hornet was designed to be implemented at the core Internet infrastructure in order to operate at the network level. It is practically -impossible- to achieve this level of migration (remember IPv6). Moreover, it requires the deployment of a PKI on an unprecedented scale, which may or may not be secure. However, it's true that some ideas might be extracted and used in other future projects.
machine code looks pretty much like the "essence of computing" to me, and that's about as far as you can get from functional programming. I think I would agree with you more if you meant the essence of computer "science". If I remember correctly there is, anyway, a theorem by Church and Turing that proves imperative and functional programming to be capability-equivalent. The argument is more about the superiority of functional programming in its benefits to software engineering and algorithm discovery by forcing rigour onto our mistake-prone brains.
>Since when functional programming is "radical"? It's the essence of computing.
It isn't representative of how processors work, unlike imperative programming. Even if the theory is there, the machine itself is imperative (most of the time), so there's a level of abstraction needed.
Though the theory could have started like that, the mechanisms are totally separated from the physical reality. In a field dominated by engineers (especially in a time where cycle counts mattered much more), that's what's going to happen.
Well, increasingly that's untrue as machine operation begins to become more data flow oriented. Even before it hits the machine optimizations are often better performed on analyses which are more "functional" in nature. SSA is not so far from a functional language.
There were honest to god LISP machines built back in the day. They never really caught on however. They were mostly oriented at the educational market, and didn't ship with such niceties like an OS or even a bootloader sometimes.
>> the mechanisms are totally separated from the physical reality.
> There were honest to god LISP machines
As LISP-flavored stack machines, yes [0]. Alas that Linear Lisp [1] never received a hardware implementation [2].
To those exploring high level language architectures, forget not also the noble SCHEME-79 chip [3]: a Von Neumannian register machine, but one which executes a SCHEME interpreter microcoded in LISP.
I'm from Québec (Canada) and you can easily find free condoms at your Local Community Services Centre or any anti-aids/healthcare organization. But, I'm not exactly sure that it helped to reduce AIDS transmission or the number of abortions (if we look at the numbers they have increased in past years), but there's a lot more to take into account than condoms usage alone. Still, I completely agree with you that it should be free. I'm curious, are we alone in this world to give free condoms or it's a common practice?
You can get free condoms just about everywhere (including the United States). The problem is that you get them free from your local family-planning clinic, or community centre, etc.
People who are at risk for having unprotected sex probably need the condoms to be easily available (i.e free in high-schools, free in bars/nightclubs, etc.). If they have enough forethought in order to make a trip to one of the places where they are free, they probably have enough forethought to buy them themselves without problems.
In Vancouver they get handed out on the Granville Street strip by some crazy lady with a bucket full of them, as well as being freely available many other places.
Strange, the problem occurred on my rMBP 2012 right after I upgraded to Yosemite (literally the same day). I also thought it was more of a software bug, so I downgraded to Mavericks. I still had the issue on Mavericks, so I thought it was a just a coincidence. Also, at that time, Apple wasn't aware of the problem and I wasn't on Apple Care, so they didn't want to test more my laptop. The only option was a straight 600 bucks repair... I still find it really strange that a lot of us had this problem after a software upgrade...
