paidleaf

That's for the overall invasion that spanned more than a month ( AKA germans defending half of france ). I'm talking about D-Day ( 1 day ) incident where hardly any fighting took place.

It was impossible for 50K german soldiers to defend the beaches because germany had no air force and no navy to protect them. The allied navy and air force pretty much cleared out the beaches and the germans had moved most of their forces to the east. Only a skeletal force of a few thousand were left to defend the beaches.

Comparing trump to hitler just dilutes the severity of hitler's crime and makes a mockery of ww2 and genocide. One shouldn't use the name of hitler to attack people one simply disagrees with.

I wish the nytimes and the rest of the media would go back to actual reporting real news rather the nonstop flamebaiting and clickbaiting.

Everytime the nytimes, politicians and celebrities compare trump to hitler, it makes trump look good and the nytimes, politicians and celebrities look bad. Trump may be incompetent, but no sane person would compare him to hitler.

"Hitler" should be reserved for the most reprehensible of people committing the most heinous of crimes, not people you don't like. It's disgusting what this canadian politician did and nytimes "reporting".

> Unions always look like a good idea to workers.

It's a great idea to older workers. Every union I've been part of sacrificed the benefits of younger or future workers for the benefit of the older ones.

> I love the New Yorker. I hope enough rich urbanites are willing to pay a subscription to keep the magazine going even if times move on.

Why would we pay a subscription for a magazine full of ads?

I'd rather support independent journalists, writers, etc than those working for establishment media. The only reason writers/journalists needed media companies was because they needed a delivery platform. Now they have the internet, maybe they should strike out on their own.

> The Wall Street Journal is the only reason the company was outed.

No. The company was outed by people long before the wsj. The wsjalong with the rest of the media was the one that built theranos up because they wanted to push the feminism agenda.

The wsj stepped in and took the credit after the exposure/pressure on social media was going to break the story wide open.

It's similar to the nytimes taking credit and getting the pulitzer prize for breaking the weinstein story which they kept quiet for more than a decade. But once social media was exposing the story, the nytimes decided to release the story they kept quiet for so long.

It's like an arsonist who helped set a house on fire dousing the house with a glass of water after the firefighters put out the fire and pretending that they saved the house.

And lets not forget that if you criticized theranos or holmes, most of the media/journalists ( including those working for the wsj ) would attack you for being a sexist or a bigot.

What decided Normandy's fate was germany's lack of a navy and their air force and soldiers being locked down on the eastern front.

Germany had like 5K soldiers on the beach with no air and no naval support against the combined might of the US and UK.

D-Day was 200K US/UK soldiers + US/UK navy + US/UK air force vs 5K germany soldiers.

It was such a rout and easy victory that most of our casualties on that day was friendly fire and accidental drowning rather than germany bullets.

D-Day is so overplayed in our media. The real fighting was in the east.

How exactly can workers gain more bargaining power when the system allows corporations to move production overseas in search of cheaper labor and encourages poor migrants ( legal and illegal ) to move to wealthier nations to undercut wages?

The modern world economic system makes it easy for capital to move overseas by removing barriers ( legal, national, borders ) while keeping labor bound to particular nations and regions.

And in regards to the US, we allow corporations to keep money offshore untaxed while if I moved overseas to work, I have to pay taxes on my earnings.

The economist along with most media has pushed the neoliberal agenda of the wealthy elite for decades while large swathes of the nation turned to the rust belt. The days of me taking anything from the economist or much of the media seriously has long passed. I consider the economist and much of the media as I do facebook, just information pollution.

Setting up the test data and pretty printing the tree is part of the learning process. I'd say it is essential.

Writing pretty printers for trees is one of the best ways to verify you actually know how a tree works rather than having a superficial understanding of it.

> It's very odd that you have chosen to declare this "improper" and discredit it as a result of your own misunderstanding.

Because that's not the proper way to learn binary trees. I felt I gave good reasons for why. You learn binary trees by building one yourself. That's the best way.

So you use data provided by others. You use pretty printers provided by others. You use implementation provided by others. So what have you learned?

Part of the learning process, especially in algorithms, is creating your own data ( to test edge cases, speed, etc ). Part of learning is setting up your own pretty printer because it sure isn't trivial the first time you do it.

Something as fundamental like binary trees and algorithms should be taught/learned properly.

Or you could learn algorithms properly

https://algs4.cs.princeton.edu/home/

https://algs4.cs.princeton.edu/30searching/

and write your own trees.

There is a free coursera course that goes along with the princeton algorithm website. Also this website has tons of exercises to help you master the subject. Not to mention all their code is freely available ( though it is in Java, not python ).

I'm a believer of learning by doing. Using something others have built for you isn't an optimal way of learning anything. Especially binary trees and the more encompassing subject of algorithms.

Inflation calculations doesn't include housing price.

But how much have home prices increased since 2000? How much has rent increased? How much has food prices?

19.61% increase in wages seems like a lot but if you factor in housing prices increased 100%+, prices of steaks increased 200%, etc, then that 19.61% doesn't look too good.