Once the results come out, so let’s hope for the best!
No, tbh I don’t. I did okay in the written test, but I’m sure I can’t manage a conversation.
I did the reading comprehension and listening parts quite nicely, and predictably struggled with the essay. Quite likely passed though.
I wanted to delete all the subfolders in the current directory:
rm -rf ./*
After a few seconds, I realize in horror that I had mistyped the path. Whole system nuked. Had backups though.
“Escanciar” in Spanish means pouring from a height for the purpose of mixing a beverage (usually cider) with air. I suppose it would still be valid if you’re pouring a mix from some height.
“Socialism turns out to work pretty well and is beating our ass” --> “Now, no one — certainly not me — is discounting the power of markets,” Sullivan noted at the time. “But in the name of oversimplified market efficiency, a large non-market economy had been integrated into the international economic order in a way that posed considerable challenges.”
Yes, you are right, but during most of that time, interest rates neared zero. I like to plot the sum of YoY inflation and interest rates since it is more stable and gives a feeling of how much headroom there actually is.
Curious how long they’ll be able to go on with the narrative that inflation will go down and interest rates will be reduced soon…
Production exists to satisfy demand that’s right. And nothing about that is any different under socialism or communism. Whether people want a new phone or not is orthogonal to the fundamental problem of who controls production.
If you can’t find a tool, this has worked to some degree for me. Open on e.g. GIMP, scale the images to the desired size in different layers, use perspective transform to align them very precisely, then set layer opacity so that you can merge them down with equal weight on each photo. It’s not a really good method, but might do the job. Good luck!
No side wants to give you affordable healthcare and housing. If they say they want to do it, but then do absolutely nothing in that general direction, they don’t want to do it.
I wonder what the writings were, although I’m cautious on believing that they were antisemitic, since hating Jews and hating Israel have historically been opposing positions expressed by two widely different demographics, and now that division is clearer than ever.
Interesting, I always thought it was a country thing, but you’re right that it’s simply a widespread confusion.
Feels weird to see the Caduceus associated hith Hippocrates; here in Europe I’ve only seen it used as a symbol of trade, while the Rod of Asclepius is the more common symbol for medicine.
It’s a really cool puzzle, nice job! The solution being a huge prisoner’s dilemma makes it all the more interesting and deep. I guess an iterated version resulting in collaboration would be difficult in this particular case, though ;)
There’s a 1/6 chance that scenario B happens, but that scenario involves 10 people, and the only thing you know is that you are one person strapped to the rail, so the chance that you are strapped to the main rail is P(main) = P(B|abducted) = P(abducted|B) * P(B) / P(abducted) = 10 * P(abducted|A) * 1/6 / P(abducted).
We can do the same for P(side) = P(A|abducted) = P(abducted|A) * P(A) / P(abducted) = P(abducted|A) * 5/6 / P(abducted). Then, P(main) / P(side) = 10 * 1/6 / 5/6 = 2. Since P(main) + P(side) = 1, then P(main) = 2/3 and P(side) = 1/3.
Edit: typo
Thank you! <3 My guess is that no to the first, since I have a 1/3 chance of being in the forked path, vs 1/15 of being in the straight path and my lever being connected. However, in the second situation I would flip it, since I’d only kill 1/3 of all people (myself every time), versus 2/3 (myself included) if I don’t flip it.
The article gives me bad vibes… On the one hand, it (and linked articles) seems to present the implicit assumption that Israel = Zionism = Judaism, which is very clearly false but could be easily used to used to “prove” other statements, like this: “Israel = Judaism -> Criticism of Israel = Criticism of Judaism = antisemitism”. Same logic can be used for “anti-Zionism = antisemitism”.
Additionally, the article does not mention any criticism of Israel that would not be considered disinformation, leaving that question open. This, of course, is dangerous, as it leaves open the possibility that people who “only care about truth” (but do not unconditionally support Israel) support restrictive measures on X as suggested by the article while those measures are then effectively meant to silence criticism of Israel.
Finally, one linked article seems to support the idea that all footage from the warzone should be fact-checked before being published. While this would curb some (minority) false footage, it would dramatically reduce the exposure that the conflict can get, as well as potentially exposing its spread to censorship from many sources.
So, overall, I think this article is using a reasonable-sounding rhetoric to push forward centralized control of social media narratives. It’s not a problem that some information on the platform is false, but if the overall narrative is biased, that would really become a problem, and X already implemented community notes (which use a really innovative de-biasing algorithm) to fight that. I can only conclude that we should resist the call to introduce potential sources of systematic bias to counter ultimately “inoffensive” random bias, which would be a step towards true authoritarianism.
Potato and tomato were native to the American continent.
They count it as Linux, yes!