Jtsummers

It backtracks using the origin direction. As it traces back to the original starting pixel, before filling the current pixel it attempts to scan the remaining directions for each pixel (which may be none). If those lead to further pixels needing to be filled it'll start going forward again, and eventually hit a dead end and trace back to the branch point and continue to scan around it, eventually discovering is itself a dead end and go to its own predecessor.

Basically, a pixel will go through states like:

  (U,R) ;; came from up, went right
  (U,D) ;; came from up, went down
  (U,L) ;; came from up, went left
  (U,U) ;; came from up, went up

Each of the neighboring pixels will be checked (that last one is superfluous and could be skipped for efficiency). Once all have been checked the pixel will be filled, and the current pixel will be set by using its predecessor direction.

> I'll give the commenter the benefit of the doubt.

Why? They admitted they only read section headers in their sibling comment. They did not read the section they complained about until after people called them out for making up stuff.

>> My apologies, I was skimming initially and, from just the headings it appeared to fit that pattern I've seen everywhere lately.

They admitted they made up their complaint based on bad pattern matching and not reading. If they had read it they would have realized the section described the opposite of their made up complaint.

> This is an invented quote...

It's not an invented quote, here's an Archive copy of the source:

https://archive.org/details/ETC3234/page/669/mode/2up

> whereas python is weakly/dynamically typed

It's strongly/dynamically typed, not weakly typed. Why do people keep getting this wrong? Has any version of Python been weakly typed? I know Python 2 and 3 aren't, perhaps the first version or ABC, its predecessor language.

> Then the last paragraph suggesting he would want to ban AI.

The article doesn't say that, though. Here's the last paragraph quoted in full:

>> And then he names the qualities required: "patience, flexibility, intelligence". So, here is von Neumann, the master of abstraction, with no abstraction to offer. Maybe through his bout of applying minimax reasoning to nuclear strategy, he learned what a formal model is worth when the assumptions are shaky and the stakes are civilizational.

Please point out where in here Murat claims that von Neumann would ban AI?

In fact, the preceding paragraphs (the rest of that section) show that von Neumann would not be in favor of banning AI, or any particular technology. It's an argument for intelligent and deliberate action, not bans. Where he does talk about bans, he talks about their futility.

> now you have people fighting in the street over stupid things like politics. wasn't like that before my time.

What are you talking about? The US was founded by getting people out into the streets and countryside to fight over politics. The Civil War was a fight over politics (the politics of slavery for the South where they wanted to keep it legal). The US has constantly had fights, actual violent fights with many deaths, over politics. It isn't something that just started after you were born.

Not was, is. The prosperity gospel is very popular among US conservatives.

If you haven't yet read it, his essay on the antichrist and One Piece is hilarious.

https://firstthings.com/voyages-to-the-end-of-the-world/

That is his stated position. His actions and words don't often support it.

That's what it is, it's basically two boards with angled cuts to match. One mounted to the wall, the other to the thing you want to hang from the wall. No fasteners needed other than for those two attachments (or more if you use more boards). Gives you some flexibility in arranging things in a shop (or, that's my reason for using it with our 2-car garage).

Second chance pool. All comments get a new timestamp with the submission for a while. Eventually it will have its original timestamp.

It's obscure, it's pretty much (until fairly recently) only known by film and scifi buffs. Go poll a hundred or so people randomly and it'll be a very small number who have heard about it, let alone seen it. And of those who have heard about it, most will only have heard about it very recently.

> Edit: why is this comment suddenly grounds for an auto shadowban??????

Your previous comment was the one that first got auto killed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50216326

I don't know why it was. Reach out to the mods (contact link at the bottom of the page), asking the question here won't get you an answer.

> I feel like debating whether he even can run for a third term

hax0ron3 didn't debate it, though. They said, unequivocally, that Trump can't be president a third time. From the top comment in this thread:

>> he still clearly can't become President again

Where's the debate? It's certainly not in that comment.

The 12th amendment text suggests he couldn't be VP because he is ineligible to be elected president under the 22nd amendment, and the 12th requires the VP to be eligible to be president. But that's about elections.

He could be appointed to the VP, potentially, but that would mean the Republicans would have to put up a ticket with the intent of the elected VP resigning so the elected President can nominate Trump as his new VP. Then get Congress to confirm Trump, which would require a Republican majority in both houses. The new VP would have to be onboard with this, or not onboard but have so many skeletons in their closet that a resignation can be forced. Which would make them a bad running mate and drag the ticket down.

> dafuk you're saying?

What I wrote in my first comment (restated for clarity):

> Trump cannot pardon people for state crimes.

You responded suggesting that I'm just hypothesizing. Suggesting that you believe he can pardon people for state crimes.

I responded with a comment pointing out that he has tried to pardon people for state, not federal, crimes and failed. That's dafuk I'm saying. I'm not hypothesizing, he has tried to do it, and failed to do it. You're the one hypothesizing about things that are the opposite of what has happened in reality.

He does not have absolute power. Is he a terrible president? Yes. Has he committed crimes? Certainly. Is his power absolute? Again, no. You're not operating in reality if you think it is. He has been checked on numerous things during this term. Enough things? No, but he does not have absolute power. So stop acting like he does.

If that's what they believe they're a strange person. Very few people buy houses in the US with cash in the bank equal to the home price. They buy them with mortgages. And someone who can spend $214k on home repair work over 4 years could have afforded a pretty decent house with that same cash and a mortgage.

Your original comment to which I was replying when you edited your comment:

> You have to count the total amount you will pay on the mortgage.

Yes. That's what I was counting, I have spent less than $214k on my house, repairs and mortgage.

Your comment after that was edited:

> A house price is a house price, you can't say it's only 20%.

What are you talking about? The question is could he have afforded a house for $214k, and the answer is yes. Houses in that area don't cost a minimum of $1 million, even the house he attempted to steal wasn't worth that much.

The courts have ruled against a number of this administration's actions, that's the "checks" in checks and balances at work here. His power is not absolute despite what you may read in many HN comments.

EDIT: And if you really think his power is absolute, then how is Kilmar Abrego Garcia still in the US?

$214k is more than I have spent on the home I "own" (have a mortgage on) even adding in my downpayment over the last 7 years. He could have bought a home for what he claims to have spent.

No, it's not.

> We should stop hypothesizing

Hypothesizing? He has failed to pardon people convicted in state courts already, because he doesn't have the power to do it. This isn't some untested hypothetical. He issued a pardon for Peters in Colorado and it didn't stand. Why? Because she was convicted in a state court.

Stop spewing nonsense.

That's not what the decision said, and the pardon is only for federal crimes. He doesn't have the power to protect himself from states.

https://www.elections.alaska.gov/election/2026/General/Sampl... - Fixed link, the space needed to be escaped to make it into the URL here.

I agree, that seems sufficiently clear.

With sane ballot design (adding the word "incumbent" next to Dan S. Sullivan's name), there should be little confusion over who people are voting for. So even if that was his intent, I'd be surprised if the name makes a significant impact on the election. Anyone who votes and is confused despite the incumbent being marked as the incumbent would probably have had a good chance of voting for any other candidate in the list as well.

> isn't that dynamic inheritance? The seems like dynamic runtime.

Duck-typing can be implemented with static checks, and doesn't require inheritance to be involved at all.

Email the mods when you botch a link, but also per the guidelines and FAQ you should be submitting source links, not archival links (unless the archive is the source because the actual source is gone, of course).

That's the HTML version, which Dijkstra did not himself produce. People took the handwritten and typed EWDs and transcribed them for the web. If you look at the PDF scan of the source document for this one it was not transcribed by Tristram Brelstaff, it was typed by Dijkstra.

In the US? There won't be a draft unless the Republicans are ready to forfeit almost all their political power.