Cogito

54 ms·

421.
by Cogito 10y ago
The paper is quite short and very readable (especially if you are just skimming and can skim over some of the details/jargon) but here [0] is a diagram (from the paper) that perhaps will help you understand what is going on. [0] http:
422.
by Cogito 10y ago
Specifically, in the post launch press event, he mentioned titanium cast grid fins a number of times. The video I saw [1] didn't have great audio and I was in transit while watching, but I believe he also said something about how it wo
423.
by Cogito 10y ago
There's no one in this thread blaming Trump. Your points stand well enough without needing to invoke what 'people' are saying - perhaps that is why the downvotes?
424.
by Cogito 10y ago
I enjoyed this article a lot. One thing that seemed glossed over, so I'm not sure if it's obvious for their use case, is the trade-off between compress once, distribute many times. When looking at how long it takes to compress vs
425.
by Cogito 10y ago
I agree that it's still too easy to screw this up using lax same site cookies. I do think that using them does provide some additional defence in depth, and specifically provides use that CSRF tokens can't. These are listed under
426.
by Cogito 10y ago
The feature itself doesn't break links in that way at all. If, and only if, (1) a website uses strict cookies on a cookie (2) the website assumes that cookie (1) is always available for 'valid requests' (3) the website assume
427.
by Cogito 10y ago
Cheers. A couple of nice features here, might even start using the 64 bit version though I doubt it will have much impact.
428.
by Cogito 10y ago
Thanks, this is probably a better landing page for HN than the linked release page! I had a quick hunt for it but couldn't see it on the release page.
429.
by Cogito 10y ago
Thank so much for posting this. Perchance, could you remove the quote formatting as it makes it nearly impossible to read on mobile?
430.
by Cogito 10y ago
Correct, strict cookies will be sent with a request that originates from the same origin as the cookie. It doesn't really break the idempotency of GET, as the idempotency assumes the cookies sent with the request are the same. That is,
431.
by Cogito 10y ago
Strict doesn't break links, it breaks sites that set "expected" cookies to strict. Those expected cookies won't be available in some situations that might have been expected, such as navigating to the site directly. So i
432.
by Cogito 10y ago
I agree with you, however our model of the solar system gives us pretty good confidence about macro level events even into the distant future. To the specific example of the sun rising - for the sun to stop rising, the earth has to either b
433.
by Cogito 10y ago
I'll take a stab :) You ask "how good are we at predicting future life expectancy?" Unfortunately I can't do an analysis right now, so hopefully this qualitative discussion will help answer it for you. If you look at his
434.
by Cogito 10y ago
If you're not aware, many of the core contributors are employed by these companies, or extensions are built internally at these companies and then released opens source. For example, the long time maintainer Junio works at Google and p
435.
by Cogito 10y ago
In a different thread, peff (author of the original post we're discussing here) requested input from the community about adding links to paid content to the site. You can see the end of the thread here [0] and the pull request it was d
436.
by Cogito 10y ago
If you didn't see it, there was another email sent out that discusses this and other issues with the Git mark [0] The trademark policy can be found at [1] A few quotes to summarise: ---- We approached Conservancy in Feb 2013 about get
437.
by Cogito 10y ago
put it up on an anonymous gist, if you want
438.
by Cogito 10y ago
Apparently there are .stl files of some of the bones available to download [0] but it seems like the given link is broken [1] Would love to see if anyone has successfully 3d printed the bones. [0] https://elucy.org/how-lucy-
439.
by Cogito 10y ago
This is a good point, so I looked into what other people have said about the two of them. The thing I think which most succinctly summarises my current understanding would be these arguments from [0]: An atheist disbelieves assertions of t
440.
by Cogito 10y ago
Hopefully it's clear that I know the dictionary meaning of 'atheist'. I'll expand the point I was trying to make slightly and address your use of 'faith'. In a very strict sense of the word, atheism is an asser
441.
by Cogito 10y ago
> faith of atheism I used to entertain this idea, that you need faith to believe there is no god just as much as you need it to believe there are 1000. Perhaps you do. What does not require faith, however, is observation - at least to th
442.
by Cogito 10y ago
An easy way to try this is to consider any that start with 1+2+3. You can create a second version by replacing this with 1×2×3. For example, 10914 = 1 × 2 × 3 × (4^5 + 6 + 789) 10914 = (1 + 2 + 3) × (4^5 + 6 + 789)
443.
by Cogito 10y ago
I'll add mine to the list - http://bom.gov.au Useful to see the weather updates as well!
444.
by Cogito 10y ago
The discussion of Hesco vs concrete barriers is an interesting one, and I think a lot of the other comments handle it well. The thing I was wondering while reading the article is what will they do after the fighting is done? Will the barrie
445.
by Cogito 10y ago
Essentially, as I understand it, if multiple people submit the same exact URL in a short period of time, they count as votes on the first submission (this may well be completely wrong, but that is how I believe it works). After a period of
446.
by Cogito 10y ago
Have you heard about the (relatively) recent results coming from experiments testing gravity waves? Hopefully they live up to your standard of science. Even if they don't, I think labelling maths and models and simulations as 'non
447.
by Cogito 10y ago
Great comment, thank you (and thank your wife for the photos, fantastic to see some of the workings!) Do you know how often the cardboard needs to be replaced?
448.
by Cogito 10y ago
My argument in context is that a paper cannot change because it has been published. I think this statement is, if not completely untrue, grossly misrepresenting how existing papers are interacted with. First of all papers, as with all pub
449.
by Cogito 10y ago
I don't get this argument. There is no new standard here. This is just a tool that says, "is there anything that looks like a mathematical/statistical mistake". The expectation that a paper's calculations are correc
450.
by Cogito 10y ago
to add to this, I want to compare to the source image! You should definitely link to the original.

More ›