prime_number_314159 @ prime_number_314159 @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

250

Joined

2 yr. ago

I consistently don't buy games that aren't ready by being a patient shopper, and watching reviews or gameplay before spending money. If you consistently jump on the hype train, buy a copy before knowing anything about the state of the game, and then "complain" to fix it, I have news:

10/10 AAA publishers would rather have $60 and a complaint than $0.

Due diligence is the solution, publishers are now very practiced at weathering criticism.

As your cardiovascular system improves, you typically take fewer, larger breaths at rest, so improving your ability to breath reduces the number of steps you'll typically take. On the other hand, most people become able to walk more steps after walking consistently.

Unless you're handicapped, bedridden, very old, or otherwise prevented by health related circumstances from doing so, you can make more with steps.

The reporting on the economy is very much in line with the sentiment "The surgery was a success. Unfortunately, the patient perished." Different metrics matter to different people. Food prices climbed faster than gas or housing, so inflation feels high (we have to make different choices to afford to eat), but it's not actually as high as it feels.

The employment rate (yes, that one, not the unemployment rate) is still not great, and lots of companies in the tech sector are tightening their belts to try to deliver on the sky high expectations they've been selling. The whole thing looks hollow.

Last time I tried freecad, the geometry solver was incorrect, so it would sometimes create two (or more) shapes from a fully constrained part. Since learning about openSCAD, I've seen no reason to give it another try.

Johns Hopkins University is named after the guy that funded it at the beginning, Johns Hopkins. He was named after his grandfather, Johns Hopkins, whose first name was his mother's last name.

So Johns Hopkins has two last names, but one of them is a first name.

I'd rather have retailers and manufacturers agree on a way to start prices high, then bring the price down towards the target MSRP every time the item is back in stock. That prevents scalping, let's consumers decide exactly how much "get it early" tax they're willing to pay, and gives the money to the people that did 99% of the work.

The simple reality is that if there are more people interested in a good at the current price than there are goods available, you must select a way to figure out who gets those scarce items. Raising prices and lotteries where you verify everyone participating is a distinct human are probably the most fair options.

Yes, actually.

-Archimedes (translated)

Reasons like drug abuse, negligence, and celebrating in a way that you specifically don't like? It fits right in with the other causes...

Covid kids?

Easy: fly across the ocean, purchase a few sweets, fly back. If you take your private jet over, you can be there and back in a single day.

I'm an extremely wealthy arabic numeral, and all my wealth is tied up in high quality French made cookware. If you pay shipping, I'll deliver a truckload of cookware to your commercial warehouse facility, and you can keep one pallet as payment.

I accept Steam gift cards, Bitcoins, and pork belly futures.

My great uncle said he hoped for a quiet death.

Not needing a wire to go to the probe part of it is pretty handy. Likewise, a washing machine that can send a push notification to my phone for "Hey, laundry is done." sounds slightly useful to me as a forgetful person.

AI answer: Type the setting into the start menu search bar. The first result will be the setting you're looking for.

I'm ignoring many factors for the sake of being able to answer. There are some kinds of heating, especially using burning fuels that are nearly 100% efficient, but we don't know why it needs to get to that temperature, or how long it needs to stay that hot - so even if the transfer of heat is 100% efficient, this computation may underestimate the actual needs.

This is easily resolved. Just start referring to the scandal involving the Watergate hotel as "Watergategate". Then the contradiction is resolved with only one change.

You have 3 liters of water heating up by 50 degrees celsius. It takes 4184 joules to heat 1 liter of liquid water by one degree Celsius, so it takes 627600 joules to heat 3 liters by 50 degrees. Dividing by 40000 joules per gram of fuel, it will take 15.69 grams of fuel per minute. Finally, for significant digits, we have to round to 16. grams of fuel per minute.

Edit: for most sciency uses, 1.6 times 10^1 grams of fuel per minute is likely the preferred way to write that.

If you can prompt it, "Write a book about Harry Potter" and get a book about a boy wizard back, that's almost certainly legally wrong. If you prompt it with 90% of an article, and it writes a pretty similar final 10%... not so much. Until full conversations are available, I don't really trust either of these parties, especially in the context of a lawsuit.

It's his third leg, I think...

11. Don't be evil.
12. Just do it.
13. Make, your dreams, come true.
14. [This one can't be translated usefully into any modern language.]
15. For everything else, there's Mastercard.