floodle

Now try converting the equation into interpretive dance.

What's your actual point?

I'm also curious about this. Randomness doesn't actually look very random. There's a surprising number of repeated characters.

I think that's their point. Since there isn't an actual correlation, their guess is basically 50/50.

Relying on a cloud-based third party link shortening service is a creative solution to your linting errors, to say the least!

"Garbage in garbage out"

Seriously?

This whole article has a pretty offensive view of people. It reads like "nobody dares to say these things because they are unpleasant, but I'm brave enough to say them and therefore they must be true".

I agree with what you're getting at. The prevailing belief in social science is that it's impossible to eliminate bias from your analysis of the world. In fact, I think many social scientists think that quantitative folks are kidding themselves when they think their clever statistical methods are free from their own personal biases.

I think the typical lens is that women are trying to avoid the costs associated with casual sex. Traditionally women paid the lion's share of costs: shame, isolation, the financial and physical burdens of an unwanted child, etc.

There's an easy solution to this: just use i for even exponents.

So (-iv)² = -vv and once you've escaped the brackets in bash all is good.

I think we're on to something here....

I know what you mean, I also took a double-take when I read that sentence. But when I read a bit further I decided it was just poor phrasing initially.

How does this lead to positive impact?

GitHub before Microsoft?

I think that was the point OP was making, through a layer of thick sarcasm.

I don't use commits as "atoms" of the work. Instead, I work at a PR level. I make PRs small and often, and try to make each one a small, self-contained piece of work, usually not more than a day or two.

Practically this means that I commit and push whenever I feel like it, but then always squash the PR. At that point I create a clean and informative commit message.

However, I leave a lot of context and information in GitHub rather than putting it in large commit messages. I rely heavily on GitHub's automatic linking of issues and pull requests for this.

You are agreeing with OP here.

OP's point is that an act can seem small on the surface ("a guy got assassinated") but triggered a larger war because there are greater tensions and forces at play ("Austria-Hungary had been thinking about invading Serbia for decades").

I do! Thank you.

This is besides the actual topic, but the typesetting on this website is just beautiful. It's a pleasure to read; almost like a print magazine.

Even worse, the "tutorial" is a challenge of sorts, where you have to guess at the right answer given hints.

I'm curious why they went for mermaid rather then GraphViz. Can anybody comment?

I'm all for regulation, but this seems like an overreach.

There must be a metaphor here for NFTs getting dropped into the total perspective vortex and coming out smiling

Seems similar to plotly / plotly express?

This is great. I just wish it was called "jess", it would be a much cooler name!

Security keys are typically $20, that seems pretty expensive to me if you are a spammer opening hundreds or thousands of accounts.

I totally agree about Gates. However I would add that public health experts and medical doctors are very different. Doctors generally make for terrible public health policy advisors! It's a very different set of skills and way of thinking about health systems.

There are a lot of very obviously German words used in the UK quite commonly: kitsch, poltergeist, doppelganger, angst, karabiner, flak...

I think a horse and buggy and a car are different classes of technology.

A better comparison is old cars and new cars. Creating waste is not the only purpose of cars, but manufacturers sure do like to push newer models for the sake of sales, disregarding the waste problem.

Right now my 40 year old car still runs just fine. But that's because public infrastructure still supports it. With tricks like manufacturer-specific garages and forced software obsolescence, a car I buy today might well not be usable in 40 year's time.

It's a pretty bold leap to find a shift in language and then presume that this represents an underlying change in how people reason.

It would be equally believable that people are simply using different, more fashionable, words, but reasoning the same as they have always done.

This article argues that it doesn't work:

https://thecorrespondent.com/100/the-new-dot-com-bubble-is-h...

Discussion on HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21465873

Bravo!

I wonder how much of this was the change from C++ to D, and how much was simply due to the fact that they re-wrote from scratch.