I’m speaking my truth. XR Adderall, crack em open and pour em on me tongue. The caviar of stimulants
I’m speaking my truth. XR Adderall, crack em open and pour em on me tongue. The caviar of stimulants
My only time-release capsule is filled with little beads, I just pop it open and eat the beads like pop rocks
I’ve been taking 6+ pills a day for years and still can’t get myself to swallow them. I just chew everything. Tasty painkillers and caffeine.
Eddie Bauer and Carhartt are my go-tos. Both carry tons of tall sizes. Wrangler has some too and may be cheaper.
Java is a fine choice. Much prefer it over pseudocode.
I have read programs a lot shorter than 500 lines which I don’t have the expertise to write.
I worked with Progress via an ERP that had been untouched and unsupported for almost 20 years. Damn easy to break stuff, more footguns than SQL somehow
Still not enough, or at least pi is not known to have this property. You need the number to be “normal” (or a slightly weaker property) which turns out to be hard to prove about most numbers.
These things are specifically not defined by the protocol. They could be. They’re not, by design.
It doesn’t, it just delegates the responsibility to something else, namely xdg-desktop-portal and/or your compositor. The main issue with global hotkeys is that applications can’t usually set them, e.g. Discord push-to-talk, rather the compositor has to set them and the application needs to communicate with the compositor. This is fundamentally different from how it worked with X11 so naturally adoption is slow.
Bitcoin is more widely seen as a vehicle for speculation rather than a decentralized currency. Unlucky.
Okay, but this makes more sense as an instance method rather than a static one
Instance properties are PascalCase.
Yeah, properties (like a field but with a getter and/or setter method, may or may not be backed by a field) are PascalCase
That’s an instance property
Yes, with Iosevka font
Stokes’ theorem. Almost the same thing as the high school one. It generalizes the fundamental theorem of calculus to arbitrary smooth manifolds. In the case that M is the interval [a, x] and ω is the differential 1-form f(t)dt on M, one has dω = f’(t)dt and ∂M is the oriented tuple {+x, -a}. Integrating f(t)dt over a finite set of oriented points is the same as evaluating at each point and summing, with negatively-oriented points getting a negative sign. Then Stokes’ theorem as written says that f(x) - f(a) = integral from a to x of f’(t) dt.
We aren’t trying to establish that neurons are conscious. The thought experiment presupposes that there is a consciousness, something capable of understanding, in the room. But there is no understanding because of the circumstances of the room. This demonstrates that the appearance of understanding cannot confirm the presence of understanding. The thought experiment can’t be formulated without a prior concept of what it means for a human consciousness to understand something, so I’m not sure it makes sense to say a human mind “is a Chinese room.” Anyway, the fact that a human mind can understand anything is established by completely different lines of thought.
This fails to engage with the thought experiment. The question isn’t if “the room is fluent in Chinese.” It is whether the machine learning model is actually comparable to the person in the room, executing program instructions to turn input into output without ever understanding anything about the input or output.
It’s called speed of lobsters