When I try to think of things that would sell out quickly, clown shoes were not on my list but here we are.
Outside of a few small local businesses that actually care about doing right by people, loyalty hasn’t mattered for decades dude. Companies don’t give a shit about any of us. Why even bother thinking in terms of loyalty, it’s completely misaligned with how they operate.
The more people get into it the less valuable it becomes is the thing. But others pointed out there’s a ton of other reasons it’s problematic, like the need for those other jobs to exist to actually, like, have a functioning society.
Edit: Also arguably a lot of the low hanging fruit coding positions aren’t as lucrative as they once were. People with experience are doing well. New people are having a tougher time getting their foot in the door compared to 5-10 years ago.
Edit: Just read that this covers grades 4 - 8 so what I said doesn’t apply.
Idk there are definitely some courses that I don’t think could have been covered in just the allotted class time without additional practice in order to be prepared enough for the university level, particularly high school mathematics and AP Calc, and physics.
Is the AI open source? Curious what you’re using and what your experiences with it are.
You’ll call a Phillips a Phillips but not a Robertson a Robertson or an Allen an Allen, smh
And trying to get by on a single income is a fucking nightmare for a lot of people.
Outrage is a social media staple, it’s not just Lemmy.
Daddy Druckmann must subsist on meals of mainstream praise and developer crunch, how else would Daddy Druckmann survive.
True but sometimes the tortilla rips open and the foil provides solid backup
That’s one of the reasons wrestling fans prefer the term scripted or staged as opposed to fake. It still requires tons of athleticism, and lots of wrestlers are still taking very real hits and injuries despite trying to minimize the impacts of them.
It’s simultaneously possible to realize that something is useful while also recognizing the damage that its trend is causing from a sustainability standpoint, and that neither realization particularly demonstrates a lack of understanding about AI.
The conventional view on infinity would say they’re actually the same size of infinity assuming the 1 and the 100 belong to the same set.
You’re right that one function grows faster but infinity itself is no different regardless of what you multiply them by. The infinities both have same set size and would encompass the same concept of infinity regardless of what they’re multiplied by. The set size of infinity is denoted by the order of aleph (ℵ) it belongs to. If both 1 and 100 are natural numbers then they belong to the set of countable infinity, which is called aleph-zero (ℵ₀). If both 1 and 100 are reals, then the size of their infinities are uncountably infinite, which means they belong to aleph-one (ℵ₁).
That said, you can definitely have different definitions of infinity that are unconventional as long as they fit whatever axioms you come up with. But since most math is grounded in set theory, that’s where this particular convention stems from.
Anyways, given your example it would really depend on whether time was a factor. If the question was “would you rather have 1 • x or 100 • x dollars where x approaches infinity every second?” well the answer is obvious, because we’re describing something that has a growth rate. If the question was “You have infinity dollars. Do you prefer 1 • ∞ or 100 • ∞?” it really wouldn’t matter because you have infinity dollars. They’re the same infinity. In other words you could withdraw as much money as you wanted and always have infinity. They are equally as limitless.
Now I can foresee a counter-argument where maybe you meant 1 • ∞ vs 100 • ∞ to mean that you can only withdraw in ones or hundred dollar bills, but that’s a synthetic constraint you’ve put on it from a banking perspective. You’ve created a new notation and have defined it separately from the conventional meaning of infinity in mathematics. And in reality that is maybe more of a physics question about the amount of dollar bills that can physically exist that is practical, and a philosophical question about the convenience of 1 vs 100 dollar bills, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the size of infinity mathematically. Without an artificial constraint you could just as easily take out your infinite money in denominations of 20, 50, 1000, a million, and still have the same infinite amount of dollars left over.
The weird thing is, I’m not sure any customers actually do care. it genuinely just feels like engineers finding ways to masturbate over how thin they can get something.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Wait I thought Christmas was a month away but we’re already getting presents?
Maybe, but Microsoft’s competitors are doing a lot better on the battery life front so they’re leaving a lot on the table for competitors to swoop in by not fixing their sleep and wake issues. It was a big consideration for the company I work at to go with Apple machines because they do lots of field work and need the machines running all day. I can say from experience it’s incredibly frustrating to leave home with my MS Surface on a full charge only for it to have majority of the battery drained by the time I pull it out of my backpack due to waking up when it wasn’t supposed to.
I think feeling frustrated that we’re not doing enough to prevent the next set of people from having to go through this and suffer this bad is a perfectly reasonable reaction to have, actually.