sfink

76 ms·

961.
by sfink 4y ago
I wonder how efficient the conversion in the article would be, after being adapted to real world "dirty" methane instead of pure.
962.
by sfink 4y ago
> In a way, this quote is saying “first do what you should have always been doing; being organized” and “then do what you came here to do in the first place (add a feature, fix a bug).” Maybe it's just me, but that's not really
963.
by sfink 4y ago
The site contents don't necessarily matter. You're at a coffee shop or library using their WiFi. Your computer sends a plaintext HTTP message. The attacker just needs to be able to see that message and get a response back to you b
964.
by sfink 4y ago
In the methodology section: "...firing angle is extremely important. Bullets fired at an angle maintain their angular ballistic trajectory and are less likely to tumble, allowing them to pick up more speed on the way down." I wish
965.
by sfink 4y ago
Well... sorting a shuffled deck of cards can be done in O(1) time. def sort(self): pass def __getitem__(i): suit = int(i / 13) rank = i % 13 return f"{rank} of {('diamonds', &#x
966.
by sfink 4y ago
Doh! You are right, of course. My head is stuck in the standard doubling approach. You are pre-copying into an upcoming buffer. Which, as you say, is going to be weird with the language model, since the "same" thing exists in two
967.
by sfink 4y ago
It doesn't change the time complexity. Both are O(n). Your point about convenience stands, though. Actually, if you go into fully pedantic mode, the set version is worse. Hash-based set insertion is commonly taken to be O(1), but that
968.
by sfink 4y ago
Hah! That's awesome. I'm not sure how well it would work in practice, since you're depending on alloc() giving you uninitialized memory—if it zeroes it, then it's back to being O(n). But that's kind of an unfair qui
969.
by sfink 4y ago
The conflation of "amortized" with "expected" feels a bit off to me. Amortized O(f) strongly suggests that the sum of n operations is very very close to O(n×f). I wouldn't say hashmap insertion is amortized O(1), be
970.
by sfink 4y ago
Perhaps substitute the actual variables if they are simple and short, otherwise do something like: > main.py:1:1 [FURB101]: Use `y = pathlib.Path(x).read_text()` instead of `with open(x, ...) as f: y = f.read()`, where y=my_important_dat
971.
by sfink 4y ago
Electrolysis was an easier thing to handle, and some APIs would still have been lost. Fission (process-per-origin) came later and would have broken many, many more. So people would have still been pissed off at Mozilla (the difference betwe
972.
by sfink 4y ago
If you're a company sitting on a large mountain of cash, then your finance team isn't doing its job. Money is there to be used, unless you happen to have some sort of monopoly. And Mozilla obviously doesn't. Competing with Go
973.
by sfink 4y ago
(1) That's Mozilla Foundation, which doesn't produce a browser in the first place. And (2) that article is not even anti-decentralization. It's just calling out that the same old stuff is happening in that world too, and the
974.
by sfink 4y ago
Apologies for being pedantic. > Copyright (c) 2014-2022 Godot Engine contributors (cf. AUTHORS.md). That doesn't strictly make sense. "cf" means "compare". It implies that Godot Engine contributors are different
975.
by sfink 4y ago
Seems reasonable to me, if you reduce it to putting the demon to sleep. The demon is always there. A forum filled with engaging, productive conversation can and will slide back to toxic crap if there isn't something keeping it in check
976.
by sfink 4y ago
Engagement is still the wrong metric for this purpose, because flamewars rate much higher than single comprehensive answers. In fact, partial or incorrect answer rate better, because the questioner will have to come back or someone will nee
977.
by sfink 4y ago
Search all open tabs in Firefox: prefix your search with "% " (percent followed by a space). Or don't, and it'll probably be in the list of suggested results anyway. ( Unless you're using container tabs, in which c
978.
by sfink 4y ago
Yeah, but it also requires some degree of wealth to homeschool. Two parents working full time, or a single parent working full time, are going to be hard-pressed to set up a decent homeschooling environment. You can rely on the "non-lo
979.
by sfink 4y ago
> This is why the majority of homeschool parents do it. I strongly doubt that. It may have been true at some point, I don't know. It was certainly my stereotype growing up several decades ago. But now that I'm homeschooling and
980.
by sfink 4y ago
My kids did very well in school academically, and weren't particularly bullied (which is not to say that it didn't happen at all, just that it wasn't a big part of their experiences.) They were both fairly popular amongst bot
981.
by sfink 4y ago
It seems to me like most of the management has turned over in the last year or two. Whether that's good or bad remains to be seen.
982.
by sfink 4y ago
This makes me speculate if intelligence was enabled by the slop available from nocturnal animals becoming diurnal. As in, perhaps intelligence would be much harder to achieve in a step by step fashion, but the adaptations to night living le
983.
by sfink 4y ago
Yeah, I would argue that SpiderMonkey's self-hosted JS is neither JavaScript nor memory safe. It's a different language that reuses much of the JavaScript implementation. It doesn't support either of the statements `foo()` or
984.
by sfink 4y ago
My personal opinion, but informed by arguments from a number of "real" scientists: because that explanation is bogus. It never made much sense. A collision of a magnitude to break off a moon-sized chunk of mass would be enormous.
985.
by sfink 4y ago
Or you can hack it with Sugru: < https://sugru.com/what-is-sugru >. Not necessarily the best for aesthetics, unless you're a clay sculptor hobbyist or something, but it sticks tight to almost everything. Though as
986.
by sfink 4y ago
Ugh, this immediately drives home the realization that representative images are soon going to be devalued and useless, to the point that we'll all be ignoring them soon. Possibly even stripping them with ad blockers or similar tools.
987.
by sfink 4y ago
Still not quite there. You haven't mentioned whether you make pancakes or not.
988.
by sfink 4y ago
First, because there often isn't a context where the word has the correct meaning in the first place. If you have a list of disallowed curse word substrings and Dr. Theodore Fucknuckett gets upset at not being allowed to login, then ad
989.
by sfink 4y ago
Purely from a clarity standpoint, I'm in favor of killing off whitelist/blacklist. They just introduce an extra step in figuring out what something is—whitelist usually means stuff to allow, blacklist is stuff to deny, but I at le
990.
by sfink 4y ago
Ha! I could say exactly the same thing. The songs ended up being some of the most fun parts to read/sing. Even when some of them made us laugh about how repetitive or strange they were.

More ›