Don’t say, “against their students”, say, “against their customers”. Which makes it sound even more ridiculous.
Don’t say, “against their students”, say, “against their customers”. Which makes it sound even more ridiculous.
Actually…yes. At least for the “war criminal”. I think the point is that you can’t hide your inner feelings from the feather. So if you genuinely, in the deepest depths of your heart, have no qualms about bombing civilians then you’re fine.
I think this points out the fundamental relativistic nature of morality and how the feather copes with it. Everyone has some sort of moral compass, and the feather measures how true you were to it. And really, what more can you ask of anyone? Decide, for yourself, what is right and what is wrong and stick to it.
Putting aside the fact that a toddler probably lacks the intellectual or emotional development to have a truely personal morality, I cannot imagine that someone who “broods” all their life over kicking a kitten when they were three is anything other than the nicest most moral person you’ll ever meet. I don’t think that have any trouble with Anubis and Thoth.
Also, the final note on the bass is a mistake, but they left it in.
I wonder how depressed Giorgio Tsoukalos’s dog is???
Anubis and Thoth weighing the heart of the dead to see if it is as light as a feather before letting them into the afterlife.
I love the idea that there’s no “do this, do that”, or a concrete set of rules or commandments. But the idea that if you can look back on your life, and if your heart isn’t weighed down with the burden of all of the things that you did that know we’re just wrong…then you can go on to the afterlife.
It’s just no much more of a reasonable, adult approach to morality.
Generally, with RPN you work from the inside out letting the results from operations inside the brackets sit on the stack until you need them. So the need for Order of Operations isn’t removed, but you don’t need special keys on the calculator for it. You do have to keep track of what’s where on the stack, but this becomes second nature after a while.
I think there might be a better way to deliver “ballistic missiles to Russia”.
Note that even if you start with an integrated wifi/router you can always by a stand-alone replacement for one function and continue to use the original unit for the other. For instance, I use my ISP supplied wifi router as a router and turn off its wifi, then use mesh wifi for whole house coverage.
Platinum also makes fountain pens. The Plaisir is notable because the cap seals incredibility well. The result is that it can go a loooonnnnggg time unused and the ink won’t dry out and clog it up. A great pen for those that only occasionally need to use a pen. Fairly cheap, too. Around $20, I think.
Vintage Esterbcook nibs are often quite scratchy. Late 1940’s and onwards Schaeffer pens have a much stiffer nib design and may be acceptable for modern carbon copy applications. I can’t remember what that newer nib design was called, maybe “Imperial” or something like that.
Also, the hooded nib of a Parker 51 could probably stand up to carbons too.
It’s just a modern version of “Fuzzy Logic”
It’s just as much a sport as figure skating or synchronised swimming.
I’m not sure if traffic is “convenience” at this point. At least where I live, it’s a nearly essential piece of functionality.
In fact, for local driving it’s often the only reason to use a map app. I already know how to get to most of the places I want to go, I just need to know the best route to avoid traffic now.
You mean “flavour”, right? Another small but important difference.
I think it’s a bit more than that. I think that the idea is that you simplify the problem so that the rubber duck could understand it. Or at least reformulate it in order to communicate it clearly.
It’s the simplification, reformulation or reorganisation that helps to get the breakthrough.
Just thinking out loud isn’t quite the same thing.
Beachcombers
It goes really well with YAGNI. Also DRY without YAGNI is a recipe for premature over-architecting.
This is also one of the main benefits of TDD. There was a really good video that I can’t find again of a demonstration of how TDD leads you to different solutions than you thought you use when you started. Because you code exclusively for one single requirement at a time, adding or changing just enough code to meet each new requirement without breaking the earlier tests. The design then evolves.
In all honesty, I think that happiness comes from finding a bean you love and sticking with it. Experimentation has its place, but…
Back in the 70’s and 80’s there were “Travesty Generators”. You pushed some text into them and they developed linguistic rules based on probabilities determined by the text. Then you could have them generate brand new text randomly created by applying the linguistic rules developed from the source text.
Surprisingly, they would generate “brand new” words that weren’t in the original text, but were real words. And the output matched stylistically to the input text. So you put in Shakespeare and you got out something that sounded like Shakespeare. You get the idea.
I built one and tried running some TS Eliot through it, because stuff is, IMHO, close to gibberish to begin with. The results were disappointing. Basically because it couldn’t get any more gibberishy that the source.
I strongly suspect that the same would happen with Trump’s gibberish. There used to be a bunch of Travesty Generators online, and you could probably try one out to see.