tripa

That was fascinating. Thank you.

He's smart enough to get one.

He's also smart enough to know he'll get a better one by giving his quest visibility.

Thanks for the link! It's labelled «vidéosurveillance» though, it feels like it only applies to fixed permanent cameras, not smartphone or GoPro ad-hoc evidence.

Got a source for that?

My cursory reading of https://www.dalloz-actualite.fr/chronique/reflexions-sur-l-u... seems to only limit it for accusation by public authorities.

These people!

Indeed.

(actual employees in our case)

Full-Time Employee

I've said it before and I'd say it again with or without a throwaway: being certified “Great Place to Work” doesn't mean we're a good work environment, merely that we allocated >1 FTE to winning the contest.

That was my understanding as well, but the links don't corroborate.

"fonts can be malicious" (on iceberg) and "font hinting is Turing complete" (middle of iceberg) are the same.

Or just the simple

    $array_ref->[2][2][1];

These are not known as widows and orphans. Widows and orphans are a single line split to a separate page than the rest of the paragraph. Parent is describing a single word split to be alone on its line.

Overly confrontational. You can and do get beats when combining nearby frequencies, and it's not at odds with sound superposition being linear.

The beats have a frequency and are audible, but their frequency is not a pitch.

They do come for a surprise visit if you tick the box in France. Used to, at least, circa 2009.

I drop to octave any time I need to do some one-off matrix computation. Also as an interface to GLPK.

So I am the 2%. Glad anyway :)

I wasn't too happy when my distro upgraded from 2.8 to 2.10. The new icon set for the toolbox may be more trendy, but I have a much harder time recognizing/understanding which is which not they're all monochrome.

Glad to see HiDPI come up.

Numbers that exceed the machine's word size have a common representation whose length is O(lg N). So a simplistic upper bound for computing N×M would be O(min(N,M) × lg(N×M))

People win it every day.

And publicly too: https://alt.org/nethack/top-3.6.php

Credibility is the quality one has when one's statements ought to be believed. OP claims the WHO lacks this quality. OP doesn't illustrate what specific statements the WHO could make that aren't trustworthy; but in the very same comment only quotes a single one from them: the fact that Covid-19 would be a pandemic.

So the only (provided) statement we should disbelieve is that Covid-19 is a pandemic. Which is precisely what OP wanted them to say. Hence the contradiction.

Obviously, this line of reasoning is tenuous, but the initial claim isn't much better, as nothing is said of what it really means for the WHO to have credibility.

I read that comment as an additional armchair semanticist making the strong claim that (exaggeration mine) the WHO should have declared the pandemic before the virus reached their own country.

Indeed.

So I read OP's comment as self-contradictory and am still not quite sure what to make of it.

My point being: some Internet rando making claims about WHO's credibility is only worth that much.

> To me, WHO lost all credibility.

Are you saying Covid-19 isn't a pandemic anymore?

I knowingly am. :-(

Parent post insisted on the acronym, that triggered my consistency response reflex.

Sorry for the slight pedantry, but PII is some American thing. GDPR deals with "personal data".

It's playing on words until you find out the PII definition isn't the one that's used to settle GDPR claims.

I've only ever heard is as chèm, so that's how I'd write it.

In older movies, you'll also hear it as "comme ak".

"Et la taulière... une blonde comme ac... comment qu'elle s'appelait?"

https://youtu.be/lGGI3ubLmaU?t=157

Wiktionary hints that variant is mostly southern, from occitan "coma aquò".

I'll add the two I had to have explained to me:

chèm <- moche (ugly), not to be confused with chanmé <- méchant (bad) (think bad motherfucker), whose ending can't affort to drop.

reuch <- cher (expensive), not to be understood as an anglicism for "rush".

Not sure I get your point.

Having atom-resolution maps doesn't help a bit it you don't know where on it you are.

Good translators manage to bring in jokes of their own.