Video games can be any combination of those three. They don't even have to be fun in a traditional sense to be engaging. In any case, they're probably looking for transferrable skills, not gamifying ATC.
2,570 karma · joined August 27, 2015
You mean edamame and sweet corn? You can grab an ear of the latter right off the field, husk it and eat it raw if you'd like. Or is there something about megafarms that prevent that?
> Most people don't know how to use them as ingredients.
If they get hungry they'll do what people have done since time immemorial and boil them. No-one will starve sitting on a cache of beans. For that matter, humans can eat pig feed directly (it's not as safe as human food, but you can boil it too).
How do you figure? The same logistics lines that carry animal feed and then the animal can just carry the ~animal~ human feed directly to the consumer. Sure, the animals starve to death, but it's just a silly hypothetical.
Three variants; "Robot" is capitalized though it is not a proper noun.
You can bring this number down by only reviewing new/low-reputation advertisers, increasing minimum spend, rate limiting, etc.
You can also pre-filter for "definitely not CSAM" and only review the more ambiguous stuff.
I think your numbers are low too, surely a moderator can review over one ad per minute on average. And it may be more effective to split-screen multiple ads (with redundancy).
But at the end of the day it's a numbers game, something is going to slip through.
If we're talking "trivially easy for a state actor," then it's not macho to say that pilots need to be able to safely conduct flights with a missing engine and a cracked windshield.
On social media, making dubious claims about food science or food ingredients, then following up by selling some "clean, unprocessed, organic" product is big business. (I make no claims about this specific NGO).
I contend that issues/tickets are as much a part of the code as comments and commit messages, and tightening the link is valuable, especially when you need to decide whether to take down an old fence. Which is a conundrum, because I agree about choosing your tools.
And Kick Online Entertainment S.A. appears to be incorporated in Luxembourg. The "S.A." is a mostly European thing, kind of like a "limited" company.
I think this is a bit of a myth. Unreal gets this criticism a lot, but it's usually because many studios choose to stick close to the rendering defaults, which does lead to a certain look.
To that point, it's probably a lot cheaper to configure Unreal or Unity into a unique "grain" than it is to develop your own engine. It's also possible to use custom physics instead of those built into the engine.
Remains to be seen, considering how much snake oil there is in the solar market (but to be fair, this makes more sense than solar roads). A news article summary of a press release isn't proof of much.
Right.
> Surely nobody in the field of academia is this limited in their ability....
Wrong.
The visualizations made things click in a way my Linear 101 course didn't.
Which isn't to say cynicism for these sorts of company charters isn't warranted, just not for that reason.
Saying SOLID makes bad code is as over-simplistic as saying SOLID makes good code.
They've seen the writing on the wall for at least a decade; that's why GameStop has more shelf space for Funko Pops than for games.
I'd love to see splitter filtering by freshness (e.g. nutrients at >=80% freshness) but I don't think that's in the cards.
> we had one opening, but five or even ten excellent final candidates
Under my interpretation , these statements contradict each other. The former implies that a candidate's failure is always the result of their shortcomings. The latter implies that a qualified candidate can be edged out through little fault of their own. The parent poster complained of exactly this; they weren't sure whether they were ineligible or simply edged out.
Although I suppose you're saying that promising candidates are kept on file for later?