![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/170721ad-9010-470f-a4a4-ead95f51f13b.png)
I love this way of thinking about it.
I haven’t been interested in AI enough to try writing code with it, but using it as an interactive rubber ducky is a very compelling use case. I might give that a shot.
I love this way of thinking about it.
I haven’t been interested in AI enough to try writing code with it, but using it as an interactive rubber ducky is a very compelling use case. I might give that a shot.
PS2 is retro now? Damn, getting old really does sneak up on you.
porn collection
Harry Potter fan fiction
These two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Oh my, what a throwback. Nicely done.
What is this, a Billie Eilish music video?
Ah, yes. The renowned unit of elite war fighters, the Green Beets.
Your analogy is very incomplete. No one is saying that Intel’s products or technology is “moving backwards”, but rather that their market share and performance as a company are declining.
Take your person “standing still” and imagine they were previously in the lead during a marathon and suddenly stopped before the finish line. They’re not moving backwards, but their position in the race is dropping from first, to second, to third, and they will eventually be last if they don’t start moving again.
I sometimes name booleans after the action that will be taken rather than the condition they represent For example, I might have booleans called “doQuickInit” or “invertResult”. I find this very useful when the value of a boolean is determined by a complex series of conditions that are not actually true or false.
From the hovertext: “I wrote 20 short programs in Python yesterday. It was wonderful. Perl, I’m leaving you.”
After years of a dozen other languages, I finally tried Perl the other day.
Never again, if I can help it.
If you read the fine print, many “lifetime” warranties are like this too. They mean the “lifetime of the product” which is usually defined in the same fine print as like, 5 years or some other bullshit timespan.
I don’t think “con job” is the whole story here. There’s always money to be made when morons gather together and soulless hedge fund managers don’t care about the side effects. What better place could there be to sell advertising space for testosterone supplements and nuclear fallout shelters?
Not to mention all the free advertising for it from both social and mainstream media.
That’s a pretty reasonable position to take. I don’t agree with it, but I understand how you arrived there.
Do you still think that being a pedophile is the only reason someone would say Rittenhouse’s shooting was unjustified?
Also right.
The point I was getting at is that the question of whether or a shooting is justified depends entirely on the circumstances that led to the shooting. Not someone’s past criminal behavior that the shooter was not aware of.
You may certainly disagree with other peoples’ reasons for viewing the shooting as unjustified. But it seems that you are either unwilling or unable to see that both people involved in an altercation can be bad. One shouldn’t be considered a hero just because he’s less bad than the other.
The dead pedo deserved what he got. Rittenhouse is a dumbass who was looking for a fight and luck was the only thing that saved him from killing an innocent bystander.
These can both be true at the same time, and saying that Rittenhouse’s actions shouldn’t be celebrated is not the same thing as defending pedophilia.
I think you missed the whole point of my comment.
There is not enough information.
Yeah, that’s the point.
Quick hypothetical for you:
John shoots and kills Frank. They had never met each other and John did not know that Frank has a history of abusing children. John claims it was self-defense.
Was the shooting justified?
Working with small ESD-sensitive electronics and using a proper grounding strap and mat with large resistors in series to provide protection from shock? Absolutely.
Wiring up a car battery or working with mains power? Absolutely not.
Using multiple desktops may help you keep all those open programs more organized. :)
I use only use them at work. One desktop is for e-mail, chats, and my music player, the other has all the stuff I need for whatever I’m actually working on at the moment. If I’m switching back and forth between two unrelated tasks, I might use a third to keep everything for the two tasks separate.
Is “multiple desktops” different from virtual desktops? Because i’ve been using virtual desktops in Windows 10 for a while now.
Nice to see a new verb used in a headline.