You’re not out of the “masculinity rat race” if you don’t do something that some people see as not manly.
I wouldn’t know whether I’m doing that because I don’t care. Got more interesting things to consider.
You’re not out of the “masculinity rat race” if you don’t do something that some people see as not manly.
I wouldn’t know whether I’m doing that because I don’t care. Got more interesting things to consider.
I think there’s a couple of people around with collective OCD that just can’t stand metaphor.
Jokes aside, and not being a sociologist, I do think it’s a good distinction because PTSD implies a maladaptive reaction to trauma, and communities, just like individuals, can process their trauma well or they can mess it up.
I get that ever model is wrong, but some are useful.
There is nothing wrong about decimal notation. It is correct. There’s also nothing wrong about Roman numerals… they’re just awkward AF.
Basic decimal notation doesn’t work well with some things, and insinuates incorrect answers.
You could just as well argue that fractional notation “insinuates” that 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/6. You could argue that 8 + 8 is four because that’s four holes there. Lots of things that people can consider more intuitive than the intended meaning. Don’t get me started on English spelling.
Terms.
There! Syntax. We went over this. Seriously, we did, and, no, I got the last word.
I suggest you check some Maths textbooks, instead of listening to a Physics major.
I can check any textbook from any discipline. You know what? I could even ask my school teachers. Because I’m not American and I wasn’t taught shit that doesn’t match up with what professionals are doing.
You’re just another yank drunk on jingoism, “We do it like that, therefore, it is right”.
You had the option to not double down and didn’t take it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCDca6dYpA
…oh wait I remember that Unicody user name. It’s you. Didn’t I already explain to you the difference between syntax and semantics until you gave up. I suggest we don’t do it again but instead, you review the thread.
Yes, you killed it.
Wait, let me try:
The earth is flat!
See how funny I am?
Really, you did it. You really did it. You killed humour so dead it’s not even working for me, any more.
Also it’s not like “getting food is easier” is the only hypothesis out there as to why we settled down. Another one, IMO much more in line with human nature, is that we figured out how to ferment beer and for that reason planted buttloads of grain.
Ackchyually… that’s completely wrong. Frighteningly so, I might add, where has basic education gone.
Ultrasound are mechanical waves, light is EM radiation. Really slow light is infrared. Really fast ultrasound is… even more ultra ultrasound. Slower ultrasound would be this.
If you’re taking photos on a nude beach in Europe you’re getting decked. Kid, adult, doesn’t matter.
There’s a massive fucking difference between sitting naked in a sauna with other naked people and sitting on public transit, fully dressed, gossiping about non-consensual nudes of children. How is that even a question. How are you capable of equating those things.
Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens.
This. So much this. If auntie wants to give them a kiss and they don’t want to get slobbered then tough fucking luck auntie, I’ll back the little shits up when they bite you. Predators are, by and large, able to do what they do because people don’t teach kids that they do, in fact, have bodily autonomy.
And while I’m at it bodily autonomy of kids also implies that parents don’t parade photos around like some fucking trophy or something. Have some basic fucking regard for your own kids and what they want. How would you feel when they’re showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.
Simlocks have completely vanished from the market at least here in Germany, mostly because carriers don’t care if you use your subsidised bonus phone with a different card – you’re still locked into a contract with two years or such minimum duration. Even those contracts have gotten rare though I think most people right-out own their phones and then make a separate contract.
Not just any colours but the ones of the German deck: Diamonds are orange because bells are orange, and spades are green because leaves are green. Also spades and leaves look almost identical anyway. Hearts are the same, and acorns become clubs.
And just to be pedantic: It’s not the “tournament deck”, it’s specifically the tournament deck for Skat, adopted when the East and German leagues reunified to avoid confusion. You’ll be hard-pressed to get your hands on a 6 or below in those colours because Skat uses 32 cards.
I do think it’s a good idea in general, though.
Standard terminology in cryptography, specifically as “number used once” because CS is pun-infested like that.
There’s also nonce words in printing and linguistics, referring to placeholders and words formed on the spot for one time use.
Finding a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros is computationally intensive and typically involves a process known as “proof of work”
You don’t have to read any further to see that it’s confabulating, not understanding: Proof of work is not a “process involved in finding hashes with leading zeroes”, it’s the other way around: Finding hashes with leading zero is a common task given when demanding proof of work.
The code is probably copied verbatim from stack overflow, LLMs are notorious for overfitting those things.
0.999… = 1 requires more advanced algebra in a pointed argument,
You’re used to one but not the other. You convinced yourself that because one is new or unacquainted it is hard, while the rest is not. The rule I mentioned Is certainly easier that 2x/x that’s actual algebra right there.
It’s as if all math must be regarded as infinitely perfect, and any unbelievers must be cast out to the pyre of harsh correction
Why, yes. I totally can see your point about decimal notation being awkward in places though I doubt there’s a notation that isn’t, in some area or the other, awkward, and decimal is good enough. We’re also used to it, that plays a big role in whether something is judged convenient.
On the other hand 0.9999… must be equal to 1. Because otherwise the system would be wrong: For the system to be acceptable, for it to be infinitely perfect in its consistency with everything else, it must work like that.
And that’s what everyone’s saying when they’re throwing “1/3 = 0.333… now multiply both by three” at you: That 1 = 0.9999… is necessary. That it must be that way. And because it must be like that, it is like that. Because the integrity of the system trumps your own understanding of what the rules of decimal notation are, it trumps your maths teacher, it trumps all the Fields medallists. That integrity is primal, it’s always semantics first, then figure out some syntax to support it (unless you’re into substructural logics, different topic). It’s why you see mathematicians use the term “abuse of notation” but never “abuse of semantics”.
The teacher couldn’t possibly fathom marking “mega” right for students who had only context from the classroom and also marking “yotta” right for students who had done independent research.
That is child abuse. Literally. The way my teachers worked, presumably because they learned how to deal with the situation when actually studying pedagogics (a thing we require of teachers here) is to give an extra point because you want to encourage kids to figure things out on their own.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewriting
…if that’s too heady do note that if you have a heap of four marshmallows and a heap of five marshmallows then that’s the same as having a heap of five marshmallows and a heap of four marshmallows. To have a heap of nine marshmallows, you first have to turn them into a single heap. That’s reducing the number of heaps from two to one and that’s a hand-wavy way to justify the term.
That’s like asking a fusion researcher whether the reactor needs to reach 100 million Celsius or Kelvin, isn’t it.
What they say they want is usually not what they want. Let me take your examples apart:
The actually attractive thing is being able to hold your own, and be self-directed. Anger and aggression are a pale imitation of that preferred by some women because they’ve never seen anything off the doormat - douchebag axis. Or, differently put: You can’t be peaceful while being harmless. If she prefers a bit of a thrill loom there like a rollercoaster handing out tickles if you dare to get on.
Is a pale imitation of loyalty. It’s what passes as attachment in lieu of meaningful connection, as relationship security in lieu of figuring out what both of you want from your own and the other’s life.
Yes she wants to be considered attractive. She likes compliments. We all do… at least from the right people, in the right situation, for a thing we want to be complimented for. The trick is to be able to mind-read :)
That’s about being cared for, having space to not have to care about things, space to stop adulting. If she generally fails at adulting that’s a red flag, if she has her shit together, heck, why not, I can make pancakes with happy faces on them.
See jealousy. Basically the same mechanism.