dambi0

The article you shared mentions a report and a committee that analyzed the report. You don’t happen to have any further details on those do you? I couldn’t immediately find the details in the article

A new account would tend not to have any history.

It seems uncharitable to immediately assume bad faith.

What is it about the content of the comment you disagree with?

I think it provides a further example to the parent post that regardless of what one thinks about the Act, the discourse isn’t entirely neutral.

That isn't true at all. Some of the argument relies on the experience of an Austrian education, but we are also encouraged to refer to other provided sources if we choose to seek other opinions.

Which is just as true of the argument

Probably because you've seen it repeated so much in your hyper-propaganda bubble of reddit that you've started to believe it

It could serve as a convenient distraction from rising prices or, more conveniently, risks introduced as a move to less staffing because of self-checkout.

It’s a bit easier to explain away the inconvenience of locked individual items as a response to a rise in crime rather than the store’s choices.

I doubt it’s a direct motivation but that isn’t to say it’s not a useful outcome either.

Or alternatively the word play wasn’t very good.

Ruling out or refining an approach on the grounds it’s unlikely to lead to a suitable outcome (fixing and removing slop) is not the same as saying this code or approach represents a good enough outcome given what we currently know about the constraints of the problem (code review)

Well seeing as you alluded to having references amongst many I figured you might have the statistics to hand. Additionally why did you focus on new registrations rather than all registered vehicles?

What if you include statistics on vans rather than just passenger cars?

How much plot could one or two paragraphs from a wider body of work contain?

We do learn more than it’s just muddy. For example the Lord Chancellor is somewhat introduced. We know the time of year. We know it’s been muddy for a while. We know the time of year. We know some term has finished so it’s likely that less people are around or it is quieter than usual. Whether these are relevant to the whole plot we can’t tell from such a short passage but that is true of any extract.

The fact we have labels for communication problems caused by failure to understand non-verbal cues doesn’t tell us that non-verbal cues are necessary for understanding

At risk of pedantry and not to diminish the overall point. I think the graphite deposit was in Borrowdale which is in NW England. There’s actually a pencil museum in Keswick, a nearby town.

Do you think humans are less likely to be wrong or just less likely to apologize when they are?

A UK post code is much more specific than a five digit zip code which might be one reason why.

With suitable safeguards or limits on what it can spend why not? On the one hand it might not fear repercussions as a human would, on the other hand it’s far less likely to embezzle funds to support its overly lavish lifestyle or gambling addiction.

Have you ever found your opinions of things, including people’s relative worth changing over time? Perhaps as you had time to understand the context, or as time revealed the benefit of an action that wasn’t so clear initially?

Alternatively perhaps the cost of implementing / performing the overhead of signing and verification isn’t worth the cost given the relatively few people who are likely to do this

Broken seems a bit harsh. It might not be idiomatic, it might fall foul of some grammatical standard. But you know what it means.

What meaning do you infer from what it says?

Your daughter may have implemented it procedurally but your description of the task was functional.

Are you saying that Rust is always the right choice for any problem? If not what’s the link between the merits of any technology and the guarantee that the selection was not resume driven?

You could just as well argue that changing direction or admitting you got things wrong requires more spine than blindly sticking to the same direction even in light of new information.

Whether that applies to Starmer is a matter of opinion I suppose

Logseq might be worth a look. It supports org-mode files to a degree. There’s a lot of org functionality. You can just about edit the files in emacs directly.

Given this is about new technologies or more accurately the potential misuse of new technology, I think we can infer we are talking newer models of cars rather than cars already on the road.

By half-life do you mean the point at which you decide to renew the certificate prior to its actual expiry? Couldn’t you as a matter of policy decide to do this at, say 45 days, even with a cert that lasts for a year? If so, then the change to 99 day expiry isn’t giving you any more options or flexibility, it’s actually removing it.

There is a difference between the question “LLMs don’t understand Bells Theorem what does this tell us about physics” and “LLMs don’t understand Bells Theorem what does this tell us about LLMs”.

Claiming thst the phrase “extremely important” is indicative of AI authorship is preposterous.

Couldn’t you just as well say that the people who were above average at English were good at science/math?

Regardless of the people involved, being asked to consider someone’s opinion on a matter is a world apart from claiming they are an authority on the topic.

I assume you meant this is a rebuttal of the parent comment. It's interesting that it could just as well be seen as confirmation.