klyrs

Looks like an antique pill press. Feels innocent enough, but it's probably still illegal. Seems like a zero-tolerance policy (ban for life for a single mistake) might not be the right balance, though.

Asking out of ignorance & curiosity: did other cultures make cemeteries before Christianity spread that practice? I specifically mean burial plots with marked graves, for which Egyptian mummified pets don't seem to qualify.

I do hope you mean bitwise "addition" and "subtraction" -- (c => c&0xdf) or (c => c|0x20)

Lists and sets suffer the same drawbacks. If the advice is to not use any of the batteries included if the language, why are we using Python?

If you want an immutable mapping, why not use an enum?

Counterpoint: there's a vast underinvestment in academia and universities are cutting faculty jobs in favor of underpaid sessional instructors. We're paying much more for administration and executive salaries which don't add value to society, only line their pocketbooks with taxpayer dollars and ever-increasing tuition.

Forgive my ignorance, but isn't that "used pizza box" fuel more or less ideal for a breeder reactor?

Wire-wrap avoids that altogether: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_wrap

You get flagged too. How the fuck is this story still alive?

Directly calling me a liar like that is a flagrant violation of the site guidelines. There are a few white supremacists here who are regular commenters; they get along by following the site guidelines. Law and order, friend. Stay curious.

> The filter exists because OP doesn't want to associate with people who are overly ideological—one way or the other.

It's like telling people you enjoy Mein Kampf or Das Kapital because you don't want to associate with people who are overly ideological "one way or another." Atlas Shrugged is literally the defining work of a specific ideology. The inconsistency here is hilarious. OP can live in that bucket for all I care.

Or maybe it's perfectly consistent and more honest than OP intended. Randianism is incompatible with society itself; bucket-dwellers rejoice.

I spend an inordinate amount of time looking at plants and pictures of plants and the first image I was shown prominently displays a species very familiar to me. Only, it's subtly wrong, with weirdness along the edges. It jumped straight of the page and distracted me from the rest of the image. Oh well, real life sucks anyway

We read the same thread. I haven't read all the context. Thanks for that.

But I disagree that he's deflecting his obligation to test more broadly -- it does sound like he's trying to get people together to do exactly that. It's easy to see this situation in black and white, and Linus's approach to the conversation is rather polarizing in that regard.

Is it just me, or has Linus lost the plot here? He says that Kent isn't interested in improving his process and "playing with others," and completely ignores that Kent is getting funding and appears to be building a team of maintainers and testers. He responds

> You can do it out of mainline. You did it for a decade, and that didn't cause problems. I thought it would be better if it finally got mainlined, but by all your actions you seem to really want to just play in your own sandbox and not involve anybody else.

How is Kent not involving anybody else? It sounds to me like Linus is fed up with Kent, not Kent's software, and is ignoring evidence in favor of bcachefs.

How do you know you haven't come across a pirate station?

If you're not a techie with an unlimited budget for bandwidth, being able to listen to music while out of the house is nice. Speaking as a Canadian where data is stiflingly expensive.

Of the dozens of men I work with, two are eligible bachelors. Both are above-average in their physical attractiveness. I promise you, that is not what women are looking for.

Comparing the bold looks of the Ioniq6 to the sporty looks of the EV6, I conclude that bold is convex and sporty is concave.

If you want to meet people, there's a lot of skill and patience required, no matter the venue.

Dancing is rather uniquely suited to meeting people. Dancing signals fitness and physical competency directly to the lizard brain. Of course, if you're bad at those things, you won't succeed in an environment of such honest signalling.

And of course, if you go to a dance class and ask somebody out after the first session, that's desperation. If you're there just to meet people, your dishonest intent will shine through. Note that I didn't say young people should dance just to meet people -- I said that they should be dancing more, and that meeting people is a side effect. Don't be sleazy.

The real trick to meeting people is that you can't try to make people like you. You need to relax and be yourself. It takes time to establish mutual fit, and the moment that's clear, you must act decisively. At that point, any effort you put towards that specific person will have a good chance of being received well. After you've been in and out of the arms of every other person in the room over the course of several months, you'll have much better perspective on how each feels about your presence. You won't flub it, you won't ask the wrong person, and your confidence will be well-earned.

Boxing is ballroom dance; katas are choreography.

So subtle. The chans are known to invade whenever articles mentioning them are posted here. They get flagged a bunch and drag the articles off the main page quickly. This may be deliberate.

Depends on the martial art: head injuries would complicate that analysis; tai chi isn't terribly aerobic, etc.

That said, dance is a really fun way to package repetitive movements. And if younger people did more of it, the men on this site would spend less time bitching about how hard it is to meet women. *cough*

> For the present exploratory study, we designed an especially challenging dance program in which our elderly participants constantly had to learn novel and increasingly difficult choreographies. This six-month-long program was compared to conventional fitness training matched for intensity.

The result seems bloody obvious to me as a dancer. Dance is exercise. And this wasn't just dance, they were learning moves and choreography. Like, no duh, teaching people new and complicated things increases neuroplasticity! According to the quote there, the activities were matched in physical intensity and one treatment added a significant mental component versus the control.

Compare dance to rowing, lifting, spinning etc. Those activities are regularly accomplished by a brainless motor. That such activities induce neuroplasticity is cool, but it's no shock that more enriching activities are better for the brain.

I think it's obvious that a younger person's brain would be more improved by this class than your ordinary seniors athletics program. I'd be more inclined to compare with other low-impact competitive sport: badminton, table tennis, etc. Like dance, those require full-body coordination, planning, reflexes, etc.

Did you accidentally throw them out with the old frame?

There are a million reasons not to say something, and a blush of legal anything should deter you from opening your mouth in public before you're straight with a lawyer.

This, a hundred times over. It turns out that communication isn't entirely a bullshit field of study* and it requires significant planning and effort to keep people happy.

* note: all fields have bullshit; this is a recent learning of mine -- unlearning, rather, of a single day of a communications class which left me with the impression that many of us here seem to have of soft sciences: all bullshit by default.

Every study would be better if it were meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. But those cost a lot, and scientists make do with the resources at hand. But I think this study has value in its own right. I doubt this study was the only one looking at these sentiments during that time period; this is just the one that got posted today.

The only thing to do is document the heck out of it with misleading comments, post it to github, and have other people link to the project, give it stars, interact with it. Continue reinforcing the machine's ego, pay it complements for its output. If we all do this enough, the GPTs will choke on the garbage and hasten the next AI winter. Do it for humanity.

What profanity, no! Eat is what one does to a meal. One must savor such an experience.

Nah, I never said you can't call out racism or racial bias. But notice that the first paragraph of what you've written is suitably mealy-mouthed to satisfy the guidelines. You're not directly calling a person racist, but you're saying that a certain behavior has racist over/undertones. This is an approach to the conversation, a very important conversation for us to have as a society which I'm hoping you'll continue holding space for, which props the door open for a curious conversation. No guarantees anybody will meet you with curiosity, but that's more to the second point.

> fundamentally means saying "these attitudes and comments are acceptable and reasonable".

Nah. It doesn't mean that. It means saying that I as a human need to pick my battles, and when I do pick a battle, not waste that energy and opportunity trying approaches that are known to not work.