epai

According to this infographic (linked below), it seems like Apple Music does give more average revenue per play than Spotify, $0.0060 for vs $0.0044. But in general, Apple Music isn’t _that_ much better than the rest where paying artists goes. It lags far below tidal, for example, which doles out $0.0125 per play on average.

https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/spotify-ap...

The sieve is made out of Graphene-oxide, not pure Graphene, so should be easier to produce.

Isn’t that what the tesla semi electric truck and airbus e-fan x electric plane projects aim to help mitigate though: the reliance on gas for shipping/transportation?

Just because some use cases are not practical for renewables now doesn’t mean they won’t be in the near future.

This is a theory, but I feel that time of posting and accumulation of advantage (initial momentum makes it more noticeable, generating even more momentum) has more to do with a post getting more or less traction than a sort of collective memory decay, at least for this particular example.

Tl;dr: event-stream repo was injected with an attack that crawls your dependencies trying to find “copay-dash”. It then attacks it to steal all your bitcoin. The attacker was given maintenance rights to the repo by simply emailing the owner, who gave the rights freely. The owner and npm didn’t do a background check. Because of the MIT license, the owner has no liability/responsibility for his actions.

Well, more state in code usually makes it more difficult to do things like run the code concurrently. You have to worry about managing data races when there is a lot of shared state, whereas in stateless code no complex managing is needed

Yep! Looks like the silent hardware upgrade happened in v5.0.0 of the OS.

Here's a youtube video published March 13th talking about it: https://youtu.be/ZzsbDGDwg1U?t=5m17s

And here's a related reddit discussion on the nintendo switch subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/8588c1/50_w....

That article studied IQ gains in students aged 17 or younger. I’m a bit skeptical the same findings generalize to adults and older, but I’d shown otherwise with other studies/sources

Maybe! Or maybe just wait - one thing we know is that technology will continue to improve, and there may be a headphone in the future that appeals to you even more by the time your PM3 gives out.

... Or maybe it's worth buying a reserve just as an investment. Some people regarded the PM-3 as one of the best value closed-back headphones on the market now[1][2]; there's a chance it may increase in price?

PM-3 Reviews:

[1] http://www.trustedreviews.com/reviews/oppo-pm-3

[2] https://www.techradar.com/reviews/audio-visual/hi-fi-and-aud...

Just to expand a little on the "you can take any loop and transform it into a tail recursion" (because I think it's cool), here's an example:

Python iterative solution

  1.  def fib(n):
  2.      i, curr, next = 0, 0, 1
  3.      while i < n:
  4.          i += 1
  5.          curr, next = next, curr + next
  6.      return curr

Python tail-recursive solution*

  1.  def fib(n):
  2.      def fib_tail(i, curr, next):                  #1
  3.          if i >= n:                                #2
  4.              return curr                           #3
  5.          return fib_tail(i+1, next, curr+next)     #4
  6.      return fib_tail(0, 0, 1)  

Some explanation of the 1-1 conversion process:

#1. We need a helper function, `fib_tail` to keep track of the variables we update in the while loop. (lines 4-5 in iterative)

#2-3. Return `curr` when the opposite of the while condition is met. (lines 3,6 in iterative)

#4. Recursively call `fib_tail`, using same update logic as while loop body when passing arguments. (line 5 in iterative)

#5. Call helper function with initial values for the additional variables (line 1 in iterative)

* We're going to pretend that Python supports tail recursion. It doesn't, but I figure more people are familiar with python; think of it more as pseudocode for instruction. You could easily implement the above in something like Scheme

From the article: “Our data shows that Tesla owners have driven this same stretch of highway with Autopilot engaged roughly 85,000 times since Autopilot was first rolled out in 2015 and roughly 20,000 times since just the beginning of the year, and there has never been an accident that we know of. There are over 200 successful Autopilot trips per day on this exact stretch of road.”

It seems like Tesla is trying to explain-away that particular incident as a one-off statistical outlier, and not the fault of the autopilot system. Appealing to statistics like that seems like an attempt to deny responsibility to me.

Reminds me of the “Department of Love”