codernyc16

“Deeply” regretting a decision he made 72 hours ago? And this is the guy who is supposed to have the forethought to bring us into the next frontier of AI?

Well even in that article they say it was most likely mold that got in there before packaging.

And how many you save

Wow, so Phoebe had it right all along...

https://youtu.be/KyaiJc3ESAI

Is this really so hard for feeble-minded drones to understand? Two wrongs don’t make a right.

He lost 45 lbs, that’s what probably removed his sleeps apnea. Not because of some other magical ability of intermittent fasting. One of my friends also lost a lot of weight and his apnea went away, he went off of his CPAP machine.

The example did not have threaded code so I find your nitpick unfair. The usage of random in their examples is perfectly fine.

You’d have to do that for all results, not just one. This is basically what an event sourced system does: you store all the events and fold your state, so you can “play back” to any point in time. You could theoretically reverse from the end, but I haven’t seen it done.

NOFANG?

I had a recent 30 day delinquent payment reduce my credit score by 80 points. And this was because the letter in the mail was mid-delivered. Not that the credit card issuer, nor the credit agencies give two shits. This was after about 5 hours of calls ping-ponging between the two.

I’m trying to come to terms with this inconvenient truth as a pretty good developer in my 30s. At some point you just can’t compete with the 20 year old recent grad drinking Jolt cola and working till midnight. You have experience on them, but also a lot of other things that hold you down: family, mortgage, etc. The future looks very confusing.

They could both arise from the same cause, but that says nothing about how often they occur. You seem to imply they’re equivalent, potentially in frequency as well. A real world account seems to suggest the negative experience happens more often. I’d like to hear him comment on it.

I do understand the initial example; and I have a story similar to yours. But you're comparing apples to oranges here: the experience of having a decent working memory and getting good grades due to schools being unable to test for real knowledge (but regurgitation of facts) and catering to the lowest common denominator, vs the ability to play a musical instrument skillfully are two very, very different problems.

My claim is that the latter is a skill that nobody is born with. Autistic savants aren't some type of magic creature that know things just by virtue of being savants. They still have to go through the process of skill acquisition. Now that process may be accelerated compared to me or you, but I disagree with your claim of proficiency with zero effort, especially with skills that have shown to require thousands of hours of deliberate practice to establish proficiency.

I think the key is in your last statement: "or appeared effortless relative to peers' efforts". It seems you found yourself in an environment which didn't sufficiently challenge you. This would only argue that you should've been pushed up to more challenging AP/honors classes. This would again have the effect of placing you in a higher standing compared to your peers. So if both you and your peers would be pushed to your true potential, it seems consistent with your statements to say your performance/output would've been superior.

So why should colleges deny you entry because of your ability to be proficient in the system they've set up?

> what if it simply comes out 100% effortlessly? What magical world do you live in? Have you ever acquired any skill in your life?