Thomashuet

Let's not persecute anyone.

the author also misses an important piece of functionality of meshcore: If I lose power, the mesh still works.

Isn't it the case with Meshtastic and Reticulum too? It feels like it should be part of the definition of mesh network.

It seems to be a USA only thing, Chinese models and Mistral don't show any downward trend.

There are some nice ideas but no continuity, it's just random bits put together. ♫ tekisco, tekisco, tekisco ♫

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to support cursive, which is how I and most people I know write.

Summary: We've use the most complexest, buzzwordiest training infrastructure to increase the performance of our base model by a whopping 0.5% (±1%).

But is there such a thing as "modern standard Arabic"?

If it just means "don't take my guns", that's what they would write on their merch instead of some greek letters most people can't read. By using this Spartan phrase they're trying to evoke the mythical greatness of Sparta, and that is what this article is about.

The main problem with this is that we're looking at the evolution of inflation-adjusted prices for common ressources. By definition, inflation-adjusted prices for common ressources must be constant, that's how we measure inflation. So it shouldn't come as a surprise that the prices do not change much in the long term.

You don't have to, you can run your favorite flavor of Linux. Unlike with the Mac Mini which can only run macOS.

You're just saying that Cobalt is small and non-profit so they must be good and YouTube and ByteDance are big and rich so they must be evil. But if you only look that what they are actually doing here, it's very similar: bypassing protections to use a service in a way that the service provider doesn't like.

Short version: a service known for evading YouTube's bot protection is complaining that ByteDance is bypassing their own protections. I agree that it's not nice from ByteDance but I find it hypocrite from Cobalt to call it evil.

Their claim that nothing tells you the email corresponds to the new issue is wrong, the "(Issue #1)" in the title means exactly that. I have actually received the same email myself and immediately recognized it as a new issue created on the repo. This user is obviously not used to GitHub issues as is made clear by the fact that this is the first issue on this repo. I guess GitHub needs to do a better job teaching new users.

I don't understand the use of a textual description. In which scenario do you not have enough space for a lens and yet have a textual description of the scene?

Tonal languages allows individuals to express way more than Latin based languages.

Do you have any evidence of this? I've never heard this claim before.

I don't see how opt-in solves the problem of people who content they don't own. They could opt-in your content just as they can currently post it on their website.

Could you expand on this? Where is the line? What's work and what's business?

The Nobel prize is usually awarded to old (around 60) researchers at the end of their career whereas the Fields medal is only awarded to researchers under 40 (and since it's only awarded every 4 years, the cutoff age can even be 36 if you're not lucky). In that sense the Abel prize is more of a Nobel equivalent than the Fields medal.

Technical report: https://storage.googleapis.com/deepmind-media/gemini/gemini_...

"We trained Gemini models using TPUv5e and TPUv4"

I have an even cheaper solution: just don't buy a ring.

It all depends on what your partner wants obviously. If it's important for your partner to get a diamond ring and you value your partnership more than the cost of a diamond, then buy a diamond. If your partner wants a "I'm married" sign (as my wife did), just buy a simple wedding ring without a stone. If it's not that important for her, don't buy a ring.

As Wikipedia puts it: Most registrants in the U.S. have registered for .com, .net, .org and other gTLDs, instead of .us, which has primarily been used by state and local governments, even though private entities may also register .us domains.

This makes .us a prime target for attackers because victims tend to trust .us more than .com. Nothing GoDaddy can do will change that.

Their website was not really hacked, it was just abandoned and someone else registered the domain and put porn there.

Yes. Actually if you just want to cover the whole space aperiodically, you can already do it with a simple rectangle, it's just that rectangles also allow you to do it periodically and this new tile only allows aperiodically.

You can display it in HTML too: https://academ.us/article/2305.17743/

The recipe it suggests is completely off. Just search for "ramen recipe" and compare. For instance it tells you to add soy sauce, sesame oil and green onions to the broth (so far so good) but then tells you to throw all of it away ("once the noodles are cooked, drain them"). The problem here is that you should cook the noodles separately in plain water, not a broth with soy sauce.

I started programming on a Ti-89 calculator and I loved it and it made me want to continue on this path. Modern smartphones would be much better for programming than my old Ti: better performance, better screen, better programming language.

The title is misleading, I expected to see a map of the changes from the last hour/day/week/month but you just get a blank map at first. And then dots appear but they disappear after just a few dozen seconds which is not enough time to visualize any trend.

Big-O assumes all "operations" are equally costly. That's not the case on real hardware, and pretty much never has been. Some instructions take more cycles than others.

No, it only assumes that there is a constant factor between the fastest and slowest "operations". It does not matter that one instruction can take a thousand times more cycles than another, if you have n² fast instructions and n slow ones, the running time will still be dominated by the n² fast ones for large n.

Big-O assumes that only asymptotic behavior matters.

Yes, and this is the only simplification that it does.

The claim is that vectors perform better than lists even in a case where the theoretical complexity is in favor of the list: insertion in the middle. However the complexity of insertion in the middle is O(n) for both vectors and lists so the demonstration falls apart. A scenario where the complexity is different would be to copy and modify the first element: O(1) for lists and O(n) for vectors.

The 200 is not the number of prisoners but a reference to a Soviet code used for deceased soldiers: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_200_(code_name)