_a_a_a_

56 ms·

631.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> Their value space... wossis mean? TIA Edit: instread of downvoting try answering. I'd like to know. TIA{2}
632.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Today is your lucky day. Have a new word; Procrustean. "forcing strict conformity through disregard of individual differences or special circumstances" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/procrustean "In Gree
633.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
A tiny bit of searching: https://replicationindex.com/2018/01/05/bem-retraction/ and a lovely quote: “I’m all for rigor, but I prefer other people do it. I see its importance—it’s fun for some people—but
634.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I don't have time for this. You clearly don't understand how science is done. Scientists propose hypotheses, the hypotheses are tested and rejected if falsified (there's your Popper). Just because something isn't testabl
635.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Probably is a good starting point. But it's not computer science, which is (IMO) a mathematical or at least more formal approach. edit: does look good, I'll dive in.
636.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
FYI https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weird-dinosaur-pr... A newly described fossil is as old as the “first bird,” Archaeopteryx, and represents a birdlike dinosaur that might have specialized in running or wa
637.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> but very little of the money given to them goes to the browser itself or even their research projects hi, do you have a breakdown or some stats for this?
638.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> The short terse answers yielding very little substantive information You asked, I answered. > The goal is to mutually improve understanding Agreed. So what is your alternative? I am aware of the Lamarkian effect of methylation on DN
639.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> It has to feel right I'm not aware of any work/research on this. Does seem reasonable though. But the rest of the insect is much larger and non-termitey, so...? (edit: so... why don't they attack/reject it?)
640.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
See mah post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37418702
641.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> Wiki link says that there is a lot of evidence against these just-so stories If you're going to rebut me, please be specific. Looking again at my link, you're right, the cursorial hypothesis has questions around it, the other
642.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> random natural selection is not the only mechanism by which organisms evolve. maybe. What is it? > In some cases it sure looks like there was a “goal” to achieve, even at the cost of sacrificing something for a while. Wiki link sugg
643.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
The most trivial bit of research would have given you an answer. I put in "wing evolution wiki" which got me a top hit of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_avian_flight , which has an entire list of hypo
644.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
That is absolutely astonishing, but something bothers me, I thought termites were blind and it says they are and rely on smell: > though termites are blind, they sense one another through touch. The beetle may also absorb unique chemical
645.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> I suppose the idea is that it promotes AWS services an advert in disguise then?
646.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Agreed about sounding odd but "a small staff" sounds fine to me. I think the missing 'a' is what weirdifies it.
647.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
reduced, minimal, skeleton, insufficient, 'a small team'.
648.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Hi, thanks. I try to assume good faith but when the same kind of posts keep appearing, opinionated, fact free and making dubious claims which they won't back up when asked, I start to doubt. Someone elsewhere on this thread described i
649.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Actually some of that rings a bell, so thank you for explaining. I believe what I've experienced is that but it's not so much an insight that needs analysing so much as having the obviousness of it thrust in your face. In my case,
650.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I cannot imagine your motivations for writing this. It's so offensively bad and inaccurate it defies my understanding. It's also dangerous enough to flag, which I have.
651.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> It's nnDMT, not 5meoDMT. She will not hurt you (my emphasis). You irresponsible idiot. That's equivalent to saying it's harmless – no drug is, all have risks both mental and physical[1] (mental perhaps being the main o
652.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I don't like this post. As a user of drugs when I can get hold of them (and strongly inclined to their legalisation), describing something as "overpowering, glorious, and delightful" dangerously misrepresent each person'
653.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
This sounds like the usual covert anti-drugs post that comes up every time, with sloppy claims and a total absence of facts. > or that you simply over-indulge in them duh. What isn't dangerous if you're stupid. > They'r
654.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Not sure if this helps or is even especially correct but: some decades ago there was a movement towards 'inner space', meaning rather than looking outwards at actions and effects on the world, it was about introspection and what w
655.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
A reasonable distinction. I accept it.
656.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
A postcondition is an invariant[1]. Invariants must hold at the end of the operation however the intervening inconsistent state must be invisible (effectively, be atomic). They often are (maybe always are?) violated within the operation b
657.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Yes. I was trying to give you an easy introduction to the idea. And which are you more likely to be writing, a distributed garbage collector or a single-core library/application? Realistically, very much the latter. And if the former,
658.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Ah, yes, thanks
659.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Interesting. That makes sense but in my experience if an assertion is triggered because something went wrong, I tend to add more assertions 'higher up' the call chain to try to catch the cause of the assertion being triggered. Bas
660.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Anything that must be true. Taking a sqrt of a float f? Assert f is positive. Can't read from a closed file? Assert the file is open. The classic, transferring cash from account a to account b? Assert that a+b before = a+b after. Objec

More ›