anon____

"Life imitates Art far more than Art imitates Life."

― Oscar Wilde

I guess it's more like a continuum than two discrete categories. On one end of the spectrum there's a family house, on the other, there's toilet paper. That's why they repeat ads even for a toaster.

It doesn't make much sense in case of a toaster, but if you bought a pen (or socks, SSDs, lightbulbs, etc.), you may buy some more after you tried it and liked it, or maybe you will try another brand.

These, too:

https://ciechanow.ski/drawing-bezier-curves/

https://ciechanow.ski/curves-and-surfaces/

The volume of the Pacific Ocean is 1.583x10^8 cubic miles. (https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=volume+of+pacific+ocean...)

The world's freshwater need is about 950 cubic miles a year. (https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=worldwide+water+use+in+...)

You can just put the leftovers back without worrying much about it.

You are reading it right.

Here is Mozilla's 2021 Audited Financial Statement [PDF]:

https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2021/mozilla-fdn-202...

The quote is from Joseph Heller's Catch-22.

They are just honest about reporting these events. Others don't, so they look better. It's easy to lie without getting caught, because most people don't experience most outages personally.

Well then maybe we should do this at night, i.e. always on the dark side of the Earth, not the one that's facing the Sun. Basically passing through the radiation that reaches us.

> cheap ice cream is full of air

Every good ice cream is. It has to be, otherwise it would be a block of hard ice, regardless of the quality of ingredients.

You are right, though, in that it could be misleading. In Europe it's generally also sold by volume, but both volume and weight is present on the label, like this: https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F....

With LibreOffice Draw you can edit the PDF (modify the text, move or change images, etc), then save as pdf, but it can't parse and save it as .odt, .doc, .html or similar.

Yes and yes. I'm not a native English speaker, though.

Definitions of the verb apply from https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/apply#Verb:

2. (transitive) To put to use; to use or employ for a particular purpose, or in a particular case

    to apply funds to the repayment of a debt

3. (transitive) To make use of, declare, or pronounce, as suitable, fitting, or relative

    We need to apply the skills we've learned to solve this problem

What's the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire?

1 million seconds == 11.57 days

1 billion seconds == 31.71 years

He wrote another book about that, titled "LSD — My Problem Child".

https://maps.org/images/pdf/books/lsdmyproblemchild.pdf.

He also has an older article on the same topic: https://ciechanow.ski/drawing-bezier-curves/.

Well, not around. The sound of a clap is travelling exactly with the speed of... sound. But not one bit faster, of course.

No, they did review them, but you didn't read the article. The excluded studies were either investigated something else, not common cold, or were so bad that they failed right away. They still gave short summaries of them, and gave the reasons for exclusion:

> Andrianova 2003: The definition of ARD included influenza, thus excluding it from our review.

> Rafinski 1974: We excluded this study because there was no comparison group and it was a non‐randomised controlled trial.

> Ushirotake 2004: As the study was not randomised or blinded, there is a high risk of bias.

> Hiltunen 2007: This study did not meet this criterion as the cellulose could not be considered a standard treatment or a placebo.

[...]

I won't copy all of them, please go and read it yourself!

If it's not a randomized, controlled, blinded trial then it's not a trial to be considered any further, their results are unreliable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial

An admin caused that, most likely to prevent a political flame war.

Can you apply that image file to help you order food? Then that's an application.

And that's why they are wrong. If anything and everything can be called an app then the word lost its meaning.

This is the PCA tutorial that worked for me: https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.1100.

Consumers won't return it, but the stores will, in bulk. That's a lot of lost food because they can't repack or relabel it.

> Your comment, and the way people tend to utilize these reviews, clearly conflates the concept of "not enough evidence" with "evidence against".

When there's plenty of opportunity to search for and find evidence, and multiple researchers do try, and repeatedly fail to find evidence (or they have mild "success" every one try out of ten, by pure luck, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging), that strongly suggests that there's no real effect.

Especially when you know that these people don't only do this with garlic, but with every single piece of spice, herb and other plant material you can imagine. Yes, some of them are effective; contrary to what many people believe (and you can read this in this thread, too), most, if not all our medicine is of "natural" (plant or animal) origin. Yet, at the same time, most "natural" stuff is not medicine. Why cling to the ones we can't prove effective however we try, when there are many more candidates?

> It's hard and expensive to do a huge well controlled study of garlic because most modern people eat garlic as a regular part of their diet. It would be hard to find statistically significant effects for prozac if the control group used it as a seasoning.

If everybody already takes this "medicine" then what's the problem? We are saved! Or... Wait a minute! How come common cold is still common?!

Also, if this were true it'd be like saying air saves us from suffocating. Well, duh.

> Authors' conclusions

> There is insufficient clinical trial evidence regarding the effects of garlic in preventing or treating the common cold. A single trial suggested that garlic may prevent occurrences of the common cold but more studies are needed to validate this finding. Claims of effectiveness appear to rely largely on poor‐quality evidence.

If garlic is so obviously effective as the other commenter claims then there should be plenty of supporting evidence, it's not that hard or expensive to test for it, yet, this meta-analysis could only find a single good quality study that showed some effect. This is called chance.

XKCD on significance (p-value): Green jelly beans linked to acne! https://xkcd.com/882/

This Cochrane review says otherwise: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6465033/.

And so does this other review: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3928210/.

In a war between Man and Machine, this could be a CAPTCHA against humans. The kind that only robots can get right.

That's only necessary when you have more than one word abbreviated the same (e.g. "db" could be either "debug" or "database"). Someone here commented that this is a missing feature in OP's solution.

Astigmatism is kind of a directional blur. If some lines look more blurry than others while looking at this image with one eye at a time, you may have it.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...

Using a standard input method editor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Input_method) solves the multiple targets problem, and it could be a universal, but customizable solution, as I explained in another comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37330658).