I think you have it in reverse. The compiler doesn't do anything with undefined behavior. The compiler takes your source and does well defined transformations on it, that according to the standard result in the same output for the same valid input. I also think it would be near impossible for a C compiler to account for all currently undefined behavior unless the standard comittee went to extreme lenghts and for example removed pointers from the language or required runtime checks on every pointer access.
There's something deeper missing (maybe something related to recursion or self-reflection?) and we don't even know what it is, much less how to add it. Yes maybe we'll make a breakthrough and build a rocket tomorrow but it won't be because of any insight we gained from tree-climbing.
Sticking with the OP's analogy, the number of people who think it is impossible to get to the mooon in any way is much, much smaller than the number of people who, misunderstanding how tree-climbing works, believe that is the way, that climbing to the moon is just a manner of climbing trees better than we presently do and that if everyone keeps climbing trees someone will reach the moon any time now.
The problem of course, is that there are no trees that reach all the way to the moon. We can keep climbing all we want and we'll never reach as high as the moon. To get to the moon, we need a radically different approach.
A rocket, perhaps- certainly! But, how long have people been climbing trees for, before the first rocket was made?
And where are the people proposing rocket designs, in modern AI research?
I see it as a game of chess dealing with this kind of person.
I guess it's still a whole number factor sort of thing.
I also wonder if those numbers are accounting for Medicare and Medicaid (which add costs to the private insurance system).
Since these are non-commerical tools, my company (in my bio) would be happy to provide free maps for these websites—as would many other OpenStreetMap-based providers.
How would you know if you are allowed to pick the fruits? Not all private properties are fenced, so if you take your bugs and go hunting for fruits you could get face to face with the angry owner, his dog and who knows in some countries his gun.
This suggests that you're not an expert. Therefore, it is wise to just stick to what the experts write, in articles such as this. That's what I do. Cryptography is a very complex subject; non-experts who give advice without knowing exactly why they are saying what they're saying are contributing to the problem, so please avoid doing that.
For example, a mailbox matches the MongoDb Collection model well.. it's a file on a disk (so there is no outer index on username needed - filesystem will do it) and you can specify which inner index(es) you would like, probably time. Storing auto-assigns internal 128bit uuids that you can use to refer to a specific message.
If you're allergic to mongo you can do this in pretty much any document store. Hell you can do it in a simple SQL table but you will have to deal with outer index (which may or may not be a problem for you).
So you end up with the classic 'privatise the profits, socialise the costs' setup.
I don't understand why people can't see that some public spending is an economic force multiplier.
I mean US infrastructure is notoriously bad for a developed economy, you have thousands of bridges that need massive remedial work to make them safe by modern standards.
Or use a “functional” style resume.
As usual, I'll recommend the classic AI textbook, "AI - A modern approach" by Russel and Norvig:
Exposing it to sunlight and/or excessive heat will cause it to age. If it's high cellulose paper, like a newspaper, it will generally yellow quickly regardless of the storage because newspaper is cheap and acidic and not intended to last.
I'd even put george washington and Vo Nguyen Giap above napoleon.
The amount of undeserved praise napoleon gets irks me. He was handed the largest empire ( french empire ) with the greatest army and destroyed it in a few years. He is the architect of a few of the military history's greatest follies. The invasion of egypt, the invasion of russia, the continental blockade, amongst others. Every major military endeavor of his was a colossal failure.
Were it not for the artificial propaganda and myth around the guy, he'd be viewed as one of history's greatest military laughingstocks.
Napoleon's greatness wasn't in the military sphere. His genius was in the bureaucratic and legal spheres.