![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
Good on you.
Good on you.
Just as fast as a car if you run as fast as a car.
I think it is called the network effect. People are still using Twitter because the messages they want to see are being posted there, and those messages are being posted there because that’s where the audience is. So, basically, people are locked in.
This also means that any loss in user count has a double effect, as not only users are lost, but the utility of the service for the remaining users decreases. So, what I’m saying is, if Elon continues this way, at some point there will be a large exodus of users from Twitter, as each loss of users reduces the utility of Twitter further, triggering a chain reaction.
Of course, we can’t know when that happens, and since we’re both on Lemmy, we’ve already self-selected as people with little tolerance for enshittification.
Yes, I made the ritual description up for a joke. I’ve never performed a human sacrifice.
When sacrificing the child, use a dagger made from obsidian. Cut upward from below the sternum, then force the rib cage apart. Push the lungs aside with your hands, then cut out the heart with your ritual dagger. Hold the heart up to the cheering crowd, and then place it in an earthen vessel in honor of the gods. Kick the body down the steps of the temple pyramid.
I’d probably take this suggestion, just to see where its going with this. (I know there’s no design behind these suggestions, but it’s funny).
It’s a bounty hunting quest, though.
The only thing a malicious host can do is to omit information, which can be mitigated simply by using more than one host, which is still cheaper than using a blockchain. You could have each signature include the previous one, which will allow anybody to verify that they have a complete prefix of the history. Host them on, say Imgur and Imgchest, and it would even be free, whereas hosting it on say the ethereum blockchain would cost about 10$ per image (Based on this: https://etherscan.io/gastracker#costTxAction. I’m lowballing my estimate. If its too high, please tell me by how much, and how you arrived at your number.)
In other words, even in the best case scenario, using the blockchain would only provide negligible benefits compared to much cheaper alternatives.
If you hear ‘full stack’, run.
What I was told by a fellow student, while I was writing my thesis (paraphrased).
Which is what makes it funny for us.
What counters a sniper in the end is good map design. Basically, no matter where the sniper is, there has to be route that allows reaching him without him seeing you before you get into close enough to shoot him.
Just as I was about to give up, it somehow worked: https://imgchest.com/p/9p4ne9m9m4n I didn’t really do anything different this time around, so no idea why it didn’t work at first.
It’s been about a year since I saw the probabilities. I took another look at it just now, and while I can find the toggle in the settings, I can’t find the context menu where the probabilities are shown.
I once ran an LLM locally using Kobold AI. Said thing has an option to show the alternative tokens for each token it puts out, and what their probably for being chosen was. Seeing this shattered the illusion that these things are really intelligent for me. There’s at least one more thing we need to figure out before we can build an AI that is actually intelligent.
It’s cool what statistics can do, though.
True, but does not address the thesis being discussed, which is that heterosexual women have more sex than heterosexual men.
Let’s go through this step by step. Each woman in your model, has slept with 3 men, men 1-3. This makes the female average 3. Men 1 - 3 have slept with all 5 women each. So 15 sex partners, divided by 5 men, makes 3 sex partners for each man on average. Average for both groups are equal. Care to try again?
Due to Fisher’s Principle, we know that there’s roughly as many women as men. So why don’t you go and take a population of 5 men and 5 women, and show how they can be partnered up in such a way that each woman is on average connected to more men than vice versa. You’ll quickly find it impossible, and that’s because it is mathematically impossible.
Women will always get laid more than men.
If we discount homosexual relationships (since the conversation focuses on heterosexuals), for a woman to have sex, there needs to be a man to have sex with her, and vice versa, so men and women should get laid equally.
drenched in sweat
Skill issue.
frozen fingers
There’s these things called gloves. You should look into them.
He wasn’t even good for the German economy though, the Nazis produces a large GDP growth through massive military spending, they bankrupted the country well before the war was over, and had they won the war, the German economy would have crashed immediately.