qwertygnu

You would. It would all come from jacob2484.

Even has the same bug where the ball glitches through a few rows!!

I TAed the class for a while in undergrad and it was one of the few CS classes with a textbook that really actually helped and augmented the lectures/homework.

The one we used was Introduction to the Theory of Computation by Michael Sipser (not hard to find a pdf online).

Linked on the first line of the article:

https://writing.kemitchell.com/series/line-by-line.html

I enjoy being reminded that we don't know everything. This isn't like dark matter/gravitational waves/relativity level stuff but it shows me that there are still many many layers of things happening that no one notices. It just takes careful observation.

It's always awesome to see early, potentially unfruitful decisions workout in a project.

I'm finding a huge disparity with your ideas. Saying that we need not worry about using too much glass, paper, or plastic because we have plenty of sand, trees, and land to bury waste, then saying we need to reduce our carbon footprint doesn't make sense.

Do you not think creating waste and dumping it in landfills, in oceans, in nature, is part of our carbon footprint? Do you not think the processes to make and transport and dispose of these materials is part of our carbon footprint? Even if trees are renewable, we in no way are using them in a sustainable way. Another commenter also linked an article about running out of sand.

Recycling is not a good answer, even doing more harm than good, but that doesn't mean to give up on reducing and reusing. And I don't mean (only) at a consumer level. We need large scale industrial and societal changes in how manufacture, consume, and dispose of goods.

> Plastic is petroleum and it's probably better that we use it and bury it then burn it.

> We also have plenty of land to bury stuff in.

> The thing we should focus on is carbon footprint.

Is this a joke?

It's been three minutes, how could it already be underrated?

I'm seeing things being changed in a lot of directions here:

It’s not just cars that make pollution. It’s the roads they drive on, too

↓

Study suggests that fresh asphalt is a significant source of air pollution

and

Atul Gawande on COVID and healthcare logistics

↓

We can solve the coronavirus-test mess now if we want to

and

The problem with C compatibility in C++

↓

The problem with C

---

(Sorry for formatting) Idk it seems a bit more than trying to de-editorialize.

Thanks for saying this. Lots of people like to jump to their own defense like "I always analyze every primary source thoroughly before forming any mote of an opinion on the subject". But identifying and understanding and accepting our flaws is much more important than trying to be right all the time IMO.

Is this the story you're referring to? https://americanliterature.com/author/o-henry/short-story/th...

This was a really awesome article! Very well written and utterly thought-provoking.

Also this blurb from the author's website is amazing[1]:

> To research her books, films, and articles, Sy Montgomery has been chased by a silverback gorilla, embrced by a Giant Pacific Octopus and undressed by an orangutan. But she is perhaps best known for her 14 year love affair with Christopher Hogwood, a runt piglet who grew to a 750-pound great Buddha master.

[1] http://symontgomery.com/

Both "cities will thin out because of covid" and "cities will remain the same despite covid" are pretty reductionist of much larger and more complicated trends I'm sure.

I'm aware I reduced the two sides in summarizing them above haha.

Me too. But I was distracted by the author saying at the end "Before that we thought we were mostly us."

Idk what conventional opinion would be, but the mass part is a lot more important in my mind than the number of cells part. We're still be 97% 'us' by mass. As an off the top of my head example, Jupiter is mostly the big gas planet thing, not the 79 or so moons that orbit it.

How would either of those situations (which are pretty much the same) cost Apple _financially_? If 10,000 people buy an app for 1$ each, the creator gets 7000$ and Apple gets 3000$. When they all get refunds. The creator refunds the 7000$ and Apple refunds the 3000$...

Add me in that category. If the company/developer doesn't care enough to put one or two sentences about what's changing, they lose a portion of my trust. Even the annoying "bug fixes and performance enhancements" message is better than nothing. But the "don't worry about what's changing, just keep our app on autoupdate!" message is worse than nothing.

So if a kid doesn't watch enough superhero/disney/scifi movies they won't understand racism...?

I agree that stoking kids' (and adults') imagination is useful and has benefits. But it sounds like you're claiming they literally won't be able to conceptualize anything outside of reality without them.