whatisyour

One solution here is: then we solve the next problem, that is: we enable a payment standard like India does with say UPI and enforce all apps to use that standard, and so all apps should be able to accept any payment method which enforces that standard.

But also, users who really care about end-to-end user experience will automatically prefer standard payment apps. So, then bad apps should automatically get weeded out.

Finally, it is possible I admit, that here, we have "What's good for an Apple user?" vs "What's good for long term goals of the system?". Because it is quite possible that the long-term cost that happens because of the monopolistic practices of Apple only impact poor users negatively, and not rich users. And therefore, the only argument that actually works is, "This is bad for the whole population in general in long term, because of the potential for abuse in future by a company."

In such a case of potential abuse, it is possible that the users would then look the government to help them out, possibly at huge cost to the government. So, it might make financial sense on the part of the government to prevent such a situation from arising in the first place. And then, the real solution to this problem would be to break up Apple the phone hardware company from Apple the iOS company from Apple the payments company.

The implicit assumption that Apple Pay is more secure is the problem here. If it is really about security or cohesive experience, then Apple should have a transparent process for approving "secure" payment methods for any vendors and allow the user to set any arbitrary default payment method in the cohesive style while putting other methods (especially Apply Pay for example in the non-cohesive style).

So, HIP at a raw level is as performant as CUDA. The real problems come from higher level stack (BLAS, LAPACK libraries for example). But not all software need higher level stack. So, then it becomes a cost benefit analysis.

A 15k AMD part vs a 60k nvidia part. For 100 Nvidia GPUs, you can buy 200 AMD GPUs and at least 2-3 engineers for 3 years at 300k to fix the specific library for that GPU. If you can make that work for a lower level library right now, then it makes to sustain it in future.

And nothing is wrong about that in my opinion. As long as the point they are making is cogent, better use of English is just better for the whole environment.

Also, I use akin and perplexing quite often in my text. The semicolon much more rarely however. But when I write professional text, then yes, I use semicolons too.

"Der Weg der digitalen Souveränität folgt aber auch einem klaren industriepolitischen Kompass. Meine Vision eines starken Digitalstandorts in Europa kann so Wirklichkeit werden, weil wir unsere öffentlichen Budgets nicht mehr nur für Lizenzgebühren aufwenden müssen, sondern in echte Programmierungsleistungen unserer heimischen Digitalwirtschaft investieren und damit Wertschöpfung und Arbeitsplätze vor Ort schaffen."

They talk a big talk about digital Sovereignty in Europe and then clicking on the English link of the page makes the page disappear. The key underlying factor of a strong open source strategy is a big enough market to justify the upfront investment in writing the code. I'm sure the state wants to talk big about open source and Europe but when it actually comes to collaborating with multiple partners, especially from non-German countries, things are going to fall flat on their face.

what about bluetooth headset?

That's a pretty useless answer. Just because you cannot fully define something doesn't mean you cannot define parts of it or have different useful definitions of it.

Spanish siesta's are still just 2-3 hours long. In traditional Indian cultures, people would often work between 6am and 11am and then from 5pm to 9pm, because middle of the day was too hot to do any kind of physical work.

So, I'm definitely going for weather as the reason for the tradition and not any timezone shift. And that also means that office work and air conditioning should reduce this practice over time.

This most probably violates Cyber Resilience Act by intentionally making their customers vulnerable to prevent security updates.

100,000 GPU based nodes = 100MW (Look at Frontier supercomputer usage)

So, 1 million GPU-based servers, which is just double of what Meta is planning to use for its own supercomputer. So, not that much.

Reasons for buying other laptop (at least for developers):

1. Better choice of desktop environment (KDE/GNOME vs OS X)

2. Wider/better selection of applications

3. Better development environment

4. Ease of deployment of your own apps

5. Better fit for your budget (why spend 3000 Euros on a limited set of features, when you can spend the same amount and get huge number of features/better features)

6. Capability to connect upto 3 external displays (which Macbook has got only recently)

Not really. Including code in your code would always be a copyright violation. The Oracle vs Google case is very different. The OP is talking about copying implementations while Oracle vs Google is about copying APIs.

The equivalent of Oracle vs Google here would be if you rewrote the exact same python module with exact same API names, but all your implementation was clean-room implementation. Here the question is, if the APIs themselves are copyrightable.

Erosion is not always wastage.

Apart from camera, almost everything is working correctly. Camera doesn't work at all.

https://github.com/linux-surface/linux-surface

I use this kernel, you can use this with most operating systems. Once things are setup, everything is extremely smooth.

I use xournal++ for note writing, and using GNOME is necessary. KDE doesn't have support for screen rotation etc. When you use GNOME, make sure to disable gestures and screen edge detection, because that might occasionally cause interfere with writing.

So, the workflow is quite simple with xournal++, you run a `inotify` based watched which automatically compiles and pushes stuff on every save. I of course assume that only `xournal++` on tab can change those handwritten notes. You can get some fancier git logic if needed. By putting the baselink as `https://gitlab.com/user/repo/-/jobs/artifacts/main/raw`, you can get the list of PDFs directly on readme of your git repo. pretty nifty for referring to later.

    while inotifywait -e modify,create,delete,move $INPUT;
    do
       publish.script --input $INPUT --output $OUTPUT
    done


    # publish.script
    pushd $INPUT
      pushd $INPUT

      printf "# Handwritten Notes\n\n" > readme.md

      printf "|  Index  | Date | Title |\n" >> readme.md
      printf "|   ---   |  --- |  ---  |\n" >> readme.md


      INDEX=0
 
      for i in $(ls -r *.xopp); do
        BASENAME=$(basename $i .xopp)
        PDFNAME=$BASENAME.pdf
        xournalpp --create-pdf=$OUTPUT/$PDFNAME $i

        BASENAME=$(basename $i .xopp)
        PDFNAME=$BASENAME.pdf
        LINK=$BASELINK/$PDFNAME$SUFFIX

        INDEX=$(( INDEX + 1))
        DATE=$(echo ${BASENAME:0:10})

        printf "| %d | %s | [%s](%s) |\n" $INDEX $DATE $BASENAME $LINK >> readme.md

      done

      if [[ $(git diff --stat) != '' ]]; then
        git add .
        git commit -m "$(date)"
        git push
      fi


    popd

You can run the inotify as a `systemd` service

    [Unit]
    Description=Starts Sync Service

    [Service]
    Type=simple
    ExecStart=%%%SYNC_BIN%%% --input %%%INPUT_DIR%%% --output %%%OUTPUT_DIR%%%
    ExecReload=/usr/bin/kill -HUP $MAINPID
    KillMode=process
    TimeoutSec=180
    Restart=on-failure
    RestartSec=5s

    [Install]
    WantedBy=default.target

For this exact reason, I decided to instead buy Surface Pro 9 and installed Ubuntu Linux on it. It works amazingly well. Moreover, all my notes are automatically converted to PDF and syned to my gitlab.

It's a very different thing between firing an employee immediately and cutting out access. You can still cut out access without firing the employee. And in many case, it could be a wise thing to do.

yes, but regaining democracy is a hard battle. So, when you destroy it in the first time, it is not a surprise that warlords keep getting control of power till by some random fluctuation, the tide changes. In western world, it took almost 300 years for democracy to be stabilized.

US also helped current regime when it first gained power.

I mean, US/UK did demolish the democracy in Iran due to their greed for oil. So, its not like their anger is completely out of thin air.

Having said that, it doesn't condone the actions of the Iranian regime as well.

What about Okular?

Xournal++ does what you are looking for.

you can disable X.509 for SSH

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/d... Germany is prety high up there.

Because it does not generate very interesting models and becomes extremely and intractably difficulty really fast.

You could write your problem as a discrete system and often that is kind of it. People have tried for a long time and the solution methods to the problems are almost impossible or too expensive.

Professional mathematicians have given it a lot of thought. Your tutor probably just didn't wonder enough about it. I did my graduate studies in numerical methods of mathematical physics, and everyone I talked to agreed, that the continuum assumption creates a lot of problems. But even so, the nice things they give in the space of functions and numerical convergence has been more important than the difficulties they cause. And hence, continuum analysis it is.

In one of my papers, I actually assumed that two features in material have to be minimum epsilon distance away to show that the method convergences in a reasonable amount of computational effort. (where epsilon is arbitrarily small) So, I did break the continuum barrier to do some useful physics ones.

When has increased barrier to communication ever been good? It's better to reduce barrier and change training rather increase barrier as a punishment.

The controversial thing is whether this should be a part of anti-trust investigations. :-P

It's surprisingly difficult to look at an idea and figure out from first principles if its any good. Most of the scientists (and people really) rely on comparing it with what they have already seen and using their experiences from things they know to judge the new idea.

So, its really difficult to judge a revolutionary theory. Crackpot theories are easier to judge however. They often have very provable falsehoods.

Would manufacturer of knives be liable for knife attacks? The world runs on limited liability.

> Silence and carry on is what false accusations deserve.

Only if there is a robust justice system which will protect you from the effects of false accusation. International law and a lot of countries not as developed as the west have no such systems.

People in less developed nations don't have that luxury.