stnmtn

Have you tried a coding agent such as claude code or codex?

speaking strictly from an energy standpoint (power grid, megatons of warheads, etc).. it's probably close to that number.

I believe this is doable through iOS shortcuts or accessibility - a gesture can be programmed to simulate a tap on a part of the screen.

So the biggest thing is the laptop keyboard layout isn't great, and not every input field is tabbable? And that prevents powers users from even trying to migrate?

Largely speaking across technological trends of the past 200 years, progress is nowhere near flat. 4 generations ago, the idea of talking with a person on the other side of the country was science fiction.

I find it very fun to follow along daily using the site, We're only at year 2 of his diary on this trip around so it's a great time to join. People comment on every entry and there's a nice little community

I would recommend Samuel Pepys' diary as well, a figure involved in England's Navy in the 1600s. He wrote a diary entry every day with a lot of candor, and there's a site I've been following that posts his diary entry for that day - so every day you can follow along with his life over the span of his ~10 year diary. I find it endlessly fascinating, even when his diary summary is basically "I woke up, worked, then had dinner with my cousins". The way he writes and the details he chooses to include I've found to be very fun

Follow along with us at https://www.pepysdiary.com/

It was well-known during that period that French shipwrights could built better ships - the problem was that the Royal Navy had better seamanship and would win most naval actions, and commandeer the better-built french ships and integrate them into the Royal Navy. So the british had the advantage of their own ships, and many of the better-built french ships.

I'm not sure I understand your point, are you trying to tell this person to not broaden their horizons when it comes to reading? To not read older novels?

We really are pretty lucky that the industrial revolution happened. Thank god for England running out of trees to heat homes with, and abundant surface coal on that island.

So that reason is exactly why the person you're replying to said what they said. The OOP said: "If you don't know what you're doing stick to index funds, buy and hold." which is clearly not great advice unless you're under the age of 30

Tab notation doesn't provide full time signature information, if you're picking up a piece of music which you've never heard played before

In tablature, imagine one string's line shows ---10-----7--8------11----13. How long do you hold each note? Clearly 7 to 8 is quick, but how quick? Sheet music gives you this exact information.

Cigarettes aren't technology so they aren't applicable here, and do you think you would classify cars as "being put back in the bag"

I sympathize but there has not been a single time in history in which people anti-new technology have ever halted progress or stopped it - once the cat is out of the bag, all you can do is deal with the cat, you can't put the cat back in.

Why would they not be loud about it? I think "We've built out 5G so we can get rid of your data caps!" is a message any telecom would want to broadcast out, unless I'm missing something

I get your point, but do you think, over the course of a decade, the average human driver or the average car with tesla FSD is more likely to have an accident where the the fault is their own?

I don't think it was Silence of The Lambs specifically - it was the experience this author had of watching that movie at 14 years old. Do you have a movie you watched at a young age, and through it you saw a window into adult life you were certain you would step into?

Silence of the Lambs is just this author's version of that. Mine is a different movie - but the way the author talked about silence of the lambs resonated deeply with me about how I feel watching "my" movie at an older age, and comparing it to how I thought when I watched it at 14.

This one made me laugh, mostly because the variable names are so dumb

// our RNG is basically shit -- horribly nonrandom at the start of the sequence.

// get a few values at random to get rid of the dreck.

// there's no mathematical basis for this, but empirically, it helps a lot.

UnsignedInt silly = GetGameLogicRandomSeed() % 7;

for (Int poo = 0; poo < silly; ++poo)

{

GameLogicRandomValue(0, 1); // ignore result

}

You can rely on it for anything that you can validate quickly. And it turns out, there are a lot of problems which are trivial to validate the solution to, but difficult to build the solution.

These clearly aren't comparable to the support of browsers. I know this metric isn't really an important signal, but they both have under 500 stars. If I'm a business evaluating whether to build my cross platform experience either on the web using the sandboxing of browsers vs smaller frameworks like this, it's basically not even a choice.

I'd recommend trying out Cursor, I personally find it does more or less what you want out of the box.

The Switch 1 is certainly underpowered compared to what it's competing with in the market with right now. That's why Nintendo is making a switch 2.

There was a link to directly to note G in the article, in fact, it's the exact same URL that you linked to.

Have considered the possibility that you might enjoy the moment right now more if you take care of your body by exercising and eating well?

Booooo

Clojure has the least measured bugs in practice? Where does that statistic come from?

What do you think a safe threshold should be?

And note that your own link said that the .3% of participants were those that could possibly show signs of myocarditis, they didn't actually contract that disease. So what does your paper show that is damning evidence to you?

That is a big ask when one could instead be productive using VSCode which has fantastic LSP support and use emacs or vim keybindings in that IDE for editing without having to retrain muscle memory.

I guess what I am asking you is what is the most important figure in that paper, as I read it and I'm no scientific expert but it made me come away more confident in the efficacy and safety of the vaccines. What am I missing that you are finding?

Doesn't your link also say this?

"No definitive case of myocarditis was found. However, the two participants (both women) with vaccine-associated myocardialinjury and chest pain met the Brighton Collaboration case defini-tion Level 2, indicating probable myocarditis in those patients (0.3%[95% CI 0.1–0.9%])"

So 2 of the participants had a .3% possibility?