Try having a conversation with Europeans about how many trillions of dollars in reparations they owe black Americans and black Latin Americans (those that are descendants of slaves), for the millions of slaves their various nations/empires transported from Africa to North and South America over centuries.
It’s an internal problem first and foremost and progress needs to be made at home first. There are models to follow. New Zealand had been making slow and steady progress righting colonial wrongs. There have been many missteps and failures but the overall direction is positive. Important differences though - systematic and large scale slavery didn’t happen and the time frame during which the damage was done was shorter.
My point primarily is that, the discussion about reparations, is almost universally isolated to how much the US Government should have to pay. It almost universally excludes the nations that dominated the slave trade, such as Britain. Various rich, powerful European nations benefited massively from the economic output of the vast slavery they initiated and maintained, while suffering essentially none of the consequences, leaving the young US nation (and obviously numerous other nations in the Americas like Brazil or Haiti) to deal with those consequences ever since.
There's no scenario where you can propose the Netherlands should compensate slave descendants in the Americas, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars or more, where you're going to convince them to even have that conversation. People of the Netherlands today will simply tell you they had nothing to do with it, and should not be held responsible for past sins, and that's the end of the conversation (unless you want a small token sum to wipe away the guilt and grievance).
New Zealand’s problems due to colonisation stem almost entirely from the British government. It should be them paying to fix it and not New Zealand, with liability for actions that New Zealand pays for starting from when we governed ourselves. However this isn’t going to happen - Britain will never pay, so fixing it ourselves is the only course that repairs the damage that can be repaired. The sooner action is taken the better.
It’s simpler here because much of the harm done relates to land theft. Working out who you repay when people don’t necessarily know where they were kidnapped from and what they lost is not the same.
You didn't mention the African kings and chieftains who sold the captured members of rival tribes to the Europeans in exchange for guns and rum. The is a key link in the slave trade that is ignored in these discussions. If you think Europeans were walking into jungles and capturing slaves themselves, you are sorely misinformed.
Not sure I see any of that where I am but if you want to stretch that view, Africa gave us humans so who owes who? There is plenty out of Africa that has helped the rest of the world, why the blinkered view?
Edit: I see that your account is a throwaway that spends its time defending the slave trade.
Well that's actually precisely the problem and conversation that reparations always prompts.
Most people's hands are clean in a direct sense. Almost nobody in a developed nation has clean hands indirectly. Very few white people were slave owners or traders. How could one possibly account for the benefit a white (or black or asian) person in Britain today derives from British slavery in the 18th century? How could you possibly proportion reparations on any nation? Should a person that immigrated to Britain in 1978 from China, have to pay taxes to cover those reparations? Plausibly there's no way to deal with that fundamental issue that doesn't involve harming extremely large numbers of strictly innocent people, and the theoretical cost would be massive if you did attempt to do it (such that it would be guaranteed to be a tax on everyone across the board, regardless of race or guilt).
I've seen a lot of valid discussion of reparations in my lifetime. The topic itself is perfectly legitimate as a discussion matter. I've never once seen a practical way suggested that it could be implemented justly in regards to any of that nations that were responsible for the African slave trade.
Only 1.2% of the former slaves interviewed by the Works Progress Administration in the 1930s reported having been raped by a master. Today, 22% of black women report having been raped.
According to Steven Crawford in "The Slave Family: A view from the slave narratives", 51% of black slaves had intact families. In 2011, only 37% of blacks had intact families.
> Today, 22% of black women report having been raped.
In the first search result I found for this, it says 18.8% of African-American woman are raped in their lifetime, 17.9% for Caucasian. They also indicate that some of the differences in numbers have to do with cultural perceptions of what constitutes rape and privacy about personal matters.
You're linking a minimal manual which is required for corporate deployment, hardly anything Apple is being forthcoming about. I'm pretty sure you and I have different definitions of acceptable disclosure - unless Apple makes the entire chip possible to audit, I don't consider it to be acceptable.
A completely transparent audit like you're suggesting would compromise the majority of the security features of the enclave. The white paper gives enough about the mechanism to understand how it works without detailing specifics that would compromise the security of tech.
So long as all frequencies you're trying to represent are below the Nyquist frequency, there's still only one band-limited reconstruction of the samples. So yes, it's still possible to reproduce everything accurately so long as all of the individual frequencies (no matter their relationships) fall below 1/2 the sample rate.
I paid $12 on Amazon for 6 Travalo lightning cables on Amazon and I couldn't be happier with them. Lightning interface is legit (no notifications about unsupported lightning connector) and they're more robust than the official Apple cables.
FFTW is one of the seminal examples of the importance of cache awareness, if I remember my history correctly. As I understand it, the reason the fftw authors (Matteo Frigo and Steven G. Johnson) won the Wilkinson prize was essentially because fftw exemplified the importance of cache-aware algorithms, as opposed to blindly optimizing number of operations.
I don't know, but I would guess that intel's implementation post-dates fftw?
Same goes for me when doing CAD and having to constantly convert between standard & metric -- 254, 508, etc show up in numbers a lot and it gives you a nice hint that it's a "clean" value in the other system. Super useful for reading IC footprints off datasheets that only use one of the two systems
[1] turns out to be more subtle than people originally thought. Even assuming you can make loophole free bell tests (hey, it's been done!), the best anyone has been able to show this does -- even theoretically -- is randomness /amplification/ not true verifiable randomness. This boils down to the need for an initial random basis preparation of the qubits for which you have no true random seed.
I know some people have been working on solving that chicken and egg problem, but -- unless there's very new work I'm unaware of -- it's still unsolved.
