This is why I like strong type systems with exhaustivity checks
This is why I like strong type systems with exhaustivity checks
Whatever happened to dailymotion?
I don’t really give a shit what you think, divorce is a big deal
Pretty condescending to tell somebody you don’t know that they need to get divorced too. Tbh libidos can go to shit after kids so yeah. Maybe my funny joke wasn’t so funny. Ah well, I always have had a crap sense of humour
Yeah but Hezbollah are worse akshually
For real though, why is everyone heading straight to divorce, instead of talking about how to tap that wife
One might argue that ‘doing nothing’ with land was an extremely good way of protecting it, but one would have to be talking to someone who was operating in good faith if they were to bother to do so…
economic metastasis
Love it
Apparently they can’t read their own survey results because DevEx is clearly the highest paid category there but they think it’s SRE and cloud
Rancher got a lot better very quickly, but I’ve never used podman and have heard mixed things about it… Might give it a whirl at some point, but I’ve been saying that to myself for years
Dunno if it’s decent but I’ve been hosting one service on quay.io since about 2017 and other than that time redhat changed the login system and I had to fart about for a few mins, I’ve never had any issues… Tbh though I probably only update that image about twice a year so I’m not exactly power-user-ing it
I never got the impression Michelle even wanted to run, and frankly I’m not impressed by the notion that the best candidate was a wife of a previous victor. Didn’t work out terribly well last time, and not actually particularly great credentials on their own
Devil isn’t as good with a fiddle as he thinks he is tho’. I dunno where I’m going with this.
When people say a country was/is “communist,” they mean it’s being ruled by Marxist-Leninists, not that it’s achieved the hypothetical level of society that usually only Marxists are familiar with.
This is a great line
Bring back political executions! I can see no downsides!
Made light of someone else’s cluster headaches in a past life
Mate, first of all: chill. Second of all: me, mincing words? You’re the one who’s decided the phrase ‘natural philosophy’ only applies to ancient Greeks. It’s literally just what science used to be called. Being very very hung up on a specific definition of a word or phrase and excluding other common usages is not a good basis for an argument. There need have been no argument at all. ‘We call it science now’ seems to be what you meant, but it’s not coming across well
Oh. And you can still do science without a theory. It’s called data collection and it is absolutely vital.
Edit: a good example would be Rosalind Franklin’s work on the structure of DNA. She did some incredible science with x-ray diffraction which was vital to Crick and Watson’s theory of the structure.
Edit X2: also ‘doing it implicitly’ is totally fucking fine if the result of being invalidated is you create a more refined model of reality. Which is, like, pretty much what the whole thing about astronomy is…
That sounds plausible but is, in fact, kinda a made up distinction you just came up with. People up to and including Isaac Newton used the phrase ‘natural philosophy’ to describe what they were doing. ‘Testing’ in any meaningful sense of the word was a part of that more often than not. Even Pythagorean astronomy was implicitly testing things by making predictions of the movement of celestial bodies. So, no, but thanks.
Edit: also worthwhile, I feel, mentioning that a lot of good science is purely observational and involves no direct testing, even of theorems. E.g early paleontology would, I feel, fit into that theme
Tbh anything that can give you a curated set of options, and some resources that can help you make the final decision is pretty incredible. But that’s the thing about most AI - it needs some human vetting for good results, regardless of how powerful it is
'spose that’s true enough