sa1

I think they do, and as you mentioned you can explicitly remove such a restriction. Sets and types are once again two different kinds of objects in mathematical theory, and a set-theoretic type doesn’t seem to be based either on set theory or type theory.

Sets and types are foundational mathematical concepts so I’m looking for how elixir’s types fit in that context. Union and intersection are not something that belongs only to sets.

Unions, intersections and negations are available in types as well and are by no means exclusive to sets. The distinguishing feature of a set vs type is that a value belongs to just one type while it can belong to several sets.

What do set-theoretic types mean? Aren’t types an alternative approach meant to avoid the paradoxes with sets?

Is it just being used as a marketing term?

The whole readme is LLM written, it might be a useful project but it might as well be a fever dream, with no easy way to tell.

But clean room reverse engineered code can have its own license, no?

> the equivalent of SEO on them

It’s called GEO and it’s becoming a thing.

Zed also downloads a remote agent.

There’s also gitbutler for this kind of workflow, a bit more visual.

Could you go into some details into how it's wrong and how you interpret this statement? Prima facie, it does seem correct to me.

Handed out? She built it.

There are such cases in uv as well, and I’ve hit them quite often when I didn’t specify lower bounds (especially for boto3).

Finite Monkeys Theorem is not the same as the Infinite Monkeys Theorem

Just read the paper directly: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277318632.... They do no such thing.

They didn't "test" the concept of infinity. They said that the results of the infinite monkey theorem are well known, and they wanted to see what happens in the finite case.

The wood dries out and cracks.

This is a misunderstanding. All the energy in our « observable » universe was compressed in that small size. We do not have any estimates of the size of the actual universe now, nor at a time shortly after Big Bang. For all we know, the universe might be infinite, both now and back then.

You should make a new post about the new sandbox feature.

Makes sense, thank you

What part is not true?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz165f1g8-E

I'm sure that there are lots of problems with this approach, but it is not as obvious as your comment makes it out to be.

One of the most predatory and litigious startups around, happy to see it dead.

ublock origin folks have asked people to not run any other blocker extension alongside, those seem to trigger the anti-adblock scripts. It might be the same case for you.

I wonder how companies will simultaneously deal with these FCC regulations in the US, and the proposed regulation to not update anything without intelligence approval in the UK.

A dehumidifier and an air conditioner are almost the same machine. For hot regions, it makes little sense to buy a dehumidifier and not an air conditioner.

Things like Sidebury affect your window width and hence your fingerprint, Tor Browser is extremely careful with these. You might not be in the market for a privacy focused browser.

However Google is saying this:

> this means that passkeys protect you against phishing and any accidental mishandling that passwords are prone to, such as being reused or exposed in a data breach. This is stronger protection than most 2SV (2FA/MFA) methods offer today, which is why we allow you to skip not only the password but also 2SV when you use a passkey.

He's talking about residency, and you're talking about citizenship.

How is it fixed when a significant percentage of the customer base will end up clicking yes, some due to ignorance, some by pure error? This isn't how security works.

With this one-time change in zoning, they can cash out by converting their single family home to multi-family housing.