posix86

Honest, genuine question: What about water dripping on the noozle? This is my main reservation with it haha.

Same issue as saying "the [party] didn't immediately respond". It's technically accurate and objective, but to me personally, it has an undertone of pointing out "just another shady way" this entity that's reported on is acting - when really it isn't.

You might disagree, because you might know what situation might prompt such an event, because you're a journalist, which is fine. But also, you're not writing for journalists; you're writing for the general public, such as myself.

Speaking for myself, if the article was written specifically for me, I'd consider such statements to be a blunder on the journalist's part, at best, and a very deliberate literary technique to ellicit a stronger emotional reaction, at worst. You're ofc not writing for me, but maybe you find the feedback interesting nevertheless.

This is like PushBullet but better. Nice work! Gonna try when I need to move something from phone to tabled to PC.

You're probably at an advantage now, but I think the effort/reward hardly pays out for the newer generation. They'll learn how to deal with this with less effort & time.

Remember that the new generation doesn't just have different tools; they're also much less experienced & mature, just like we were.You can only really compare yourself to them in the future where they're at the place you're at now.

Look at the quadratic bezier fragment shader in https://hhoppe.com/proj/ravg/ might generalize well zo 3d.

Looks interesting! Another interesting paper on this subject is 1. They seem to have a different approach; the one I reference uses a quadratic bezier approximation that is fast for random access graphics such as fragment shaders. This is very useful for having screen space constant width shapes in 2- or 3d space, skimming the paper that appears to require much more preprocessing.

1: https://hhoppe.com/proj/ravg/

> but what does it mean if they're at 0? They can't be mutually unintelligible, since that would make them different languages.

I think it might actually mean unintelligible. If you read on the term "dialect" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialect it says in part:

> There is no universally accepted criterion for distinguishing two different languages from two dialects (i.e. varieties) of the same language.

The difference between language is more culturally and politically defined than linguistically; there are different langauges spoken in the world that have a fiar overlap and elligibility, and there are different dialects of the same "language" that are basically untelligable. It might be sensible to just consider all spoken systems to be "dialects" of each other, and comparing their similarity.

Not a linguist though.

VSCode can also be used more or less effectively though. There are quite a few shortcuts & tricks that can make you 10x more productive, even if maybe it's not as much as vim.

As Mark Manson put it: As long as you look back at your past self and cringe, you know you're growing :)

Reminds me of a prof at uni, who's slides always appeard to have been written 5 mins before the lecture started, resulting in students pointing out mistakes in every other slide. He defended himself saying that you learn more if you aren't sure weather things are correct - which was right. Esp. during a lecture, it's sometimes not that easy to figure out if you truly understood something or fooled yourself, knowing that what you're looking at is provably right. If you know everything can be wrong, you trick your mind to verify it at a deeper level, and thus gain more understanding. It also results in a culture where you're allowed to question the prof. It resulted in many healthy arguments with the prof why something is the way it is, often resulting with him agreeing that his slides are wrong. He never corrected the underlying PPP.

What stands out as odd to me is that CF seems to be pushing away a $10k/month customer. No business can reasonably be expected to accept sudden price changes like that, even if they'd paid, they would've moved away within a year.

Given that the article is an online casino that seems to be using potentially ToS violating domain rotation, and that they pay so little per month for apparently millions of users, I for one will not form an opinion on CF based on this article before CF has a chance to defend itself.

Depends on the mathematical framework you're working with.... there's a genre in theoretical compsci that deals with parallel algorithms, and as a toy example, I remember an O(1) sorting algo (given O(n^2) processors). This example is more fun than anything, but ofc in general you're free what constraints you subject your statements to.

61 pins are used by 1/3rd of all people. So statistically, if I steal 61 debit cards, assuming I have 3 tries, and assuming people choose their own pin, I should be able to get cash off one in expectation.

Unlreated: Is the title correct english?

it says so in the link posted!! read before writing

Textbooks are generally way more carefully made in terms of their presentation, the order of information, their examples. At least in uni, classes that follow a textbook where much nicer to get into for me personally. Why listen to an unmotivated professor reading his notes that he made in 3h for a one time audience of 300 when I could read a textbook that was made in the span of multiple years for an audience of hundreds of thousands?

They put it correctly in the article tho:

> Using Bloomberg’s numbers, ChatGPT does NOT appear to have a racial bias when it comes to judging software engineers’ resumes.2 The results appear to be more noise than signal.

Which in most contexts means the same as "does appear to not have a racial bias", but not in statistics. One of the reasons why communicating results in research accurately is incredably hard.

How does GC help with that?

2 sessions of 15 minutes of 12 participants? This can hardly be statistically relevant?

+1, researching something? Open Google, open 5 links, all in the same group! That's what'd make the feature useful to me.

How, if both your acceleration and your top speed is worse?

And it's so much easier to pay by phone! I can be through the payment process in 20 seconds at a supermarket if I pay with my phone, and need nothing on me than my phone. Meanwhile cash takes fumbling, counting either by a machine or by a person, calculation in my head what I need to provide, making sure I always have not too little and not too much on me, making sure the total amount of coins doesn't get out of hand, etc.

Call me close minded but i see cash as an archaic, strictly inferior way of managing money. But to each their own.

That'd make the heavy characters completely useless, once you're behind, there's no way to catch up anymore!

It removes the incentive for clients to use cash if a card option is available, makes them more used to paying by card, and hence decreases the competitiveness of merchants that don't offer card at all - until cards become so wide spread that many merchants don't even accept cash at all, like where I live.

A bit hostile towards merchants, but very nice for consumers imo.

This works well until you accidentally have an if/else branch, then you get hard to track bugs (halting problem in the general case).

I'm guessing this is why they don't propose to add this function to the standard: That fact makes it not very pretty.

I don't understand enough about the subject to say, but to me it seemed like yes, other models have better metrics with equal model size i.t.o. number of neurons or asymptotic runtime, but the most important metric will always be accuracy/precision/etc for money spent... or in other words, if GPT requires 10x number of neurons to reach the same performance, but buying compute & memory for these neuros is cheaper, then GPT is a better means to an end.

It's not complicated though

Sticking to the truth & what you really know, and not scape goating?

Agreed, read a few sentence & move on.