marcos @ marcos @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

1,920

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well, everybody does stupid things, and he may have wanted to get caught...

But the entire story is incredibly weird. It looks like those official explanations that say "well, he shot himself on the head and 20 minutes later shot his wife; that's absolutely the case!"

Well, I'm pretty sure bacteria and others aren't thrilled by the blatant and offensive pro-prokaryote bias on that name.

Yeah, like asbestos... if asbestos bio-accumulated forever.

Instead, the world has a few mechanisms that will make asbestos harmless after a few generations. Not so much for diamonds.

Of all the aerosols they could think about!

No chance at all of a basically indestructible material not being destructed if absorbed by lungs (or gills) and leading to some disease. You don't need to check. There's no way this could go wrong.

Or, rather... I believe lead is cheaper... Given how much people like to use it, maybe it's a better option.

They are valid unicode points that your font doesn't know about.

... or at least they represent that, but I think there's a character that looks like one too.

He is a sponge. He has either no skeleton, or that weird soft one where no piece links to each other.

intermediary language between regex and actual programming

It's called Haskell.

It's amazing how many pixels somebody can lose in 14 years!

Spreading it to whom if everybody there is a bot?

Validate your backups, do not let them validate you!

Yes, there are random systems using every kind of smart or brain-dead option out there.

But the 2038 problem impacts the previous standard, and the current one will take ages to fail. (No, it's not 33000, unless you are using some variant of the standard that counts nanoseconds instead of seconds. Those usually have more bits nowadays, but some odd older systems do it on the same 64 bits from the standard.)

There's a lot of water and ions (IONS!) besides that lump of fat.

In case you want a serious treatment, for nominal profit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics#The_Keynesian_multiplier

For real profit, labor productivity must put some limit on it somewhere, but I have never seen anybody look at it.

Either way, "profit" is not something you squeeze out of society. The nominal one can't be unbalanced, and the real one is hard to even track.

You may get some better answers if think in terms of wealth inequality. But that one won't appear on the coarse level of the wikipedia article.

That's why they talk so easily about unities like "goalposts per supercarrier", US people are used to the confusion.

If you got a problem, reinstall and do the same stuff again, you'll almost certainly get the same problem again. So, no, it's only productive if you are in a fucked-up environment where changes bring more breakage than they fix.

It's useful if you don't plan to do the same thing again, though. So if you are just trying random stuff, yeah, go ahead.

Torx is more resilient to over-torsion than Hex, but both of them will end near the end of the list on that one metric, with slot first, and way ahead of anything else.

Despite what the Torx publicity says, engineering is done over a multitude of dimensions, and that one dimension Torx wins may not be nearly as important as some other random one.

What they don't say is that the smaller the features on the contact, the easier it is to strip them. This almost reverses the order on your post depending on the way you tighten the screw.

There are both kinds of full stack developers: the frontend dev that doesn't understand the backend enough to know they suck at it, and the backend dev that doesn't understand the frontend enough to know they suck at it.

A has been consistently improving it since before the change, so it's only possible that they are managing to the metric if they had earlier access to it.

B may be doing that, but the graph doesn't actually measure how many bugs you closed. Those ones seem to have decided to manage by the metric, removing the variance but targeting a high, comfortable level.

Agreed on C, they did a large "hey, we will be measured by that now" one time effort and then forgot about the metric.

The change didn't improve anybody's performance.

You might want to check that first source again.

About the second one... WTF? You'd wish to consult your Catholic traditions from some Catholic authority. Not whatever that is. But the first paragraph is almost normal, stick to it.