I recently switched my instance from gitea to forgejo because everyone said to do it and it was easy to do.

Tick tock, it’s Tactics o’clock.

It can be forked by anyone, but what is already out there will always be there.

And how does this hurt all of us who use it for open source projects?

It doesn’t matter. You check the first of each group and pick the smallest, then compare the one you didn’t pick with the next one of the other group. In your example, you would pick all of the ones from the right side and once it is empty, just add all the ones on the left.

When you merge two sorted lists, you only have to compare the first element of each, since you can trust that all of the other elements are bigger. All the steps before that are there to make sure that is true.

On MacOS you get a choice when you format the drive.

To be honest, that seems like it should be the one thing they are reliably good at. It requires just looking up info on their database, with no manipulation.

That’s not how they are designed at all. LLMs are just text predictors. If the user inputs something like “A B C D E F” then the next most likely word would be “G”.

Companies like OpenAI will try to add context to make things seem smarter, like prime it with the current date so it won’t just respond with some date it was trained on, or look for info on specific people or whatnot, but at its core, they are just really big auto fill text predictors.

The network effect is real. You can have the best, most awesomely-designed social media platform ever and it will be useless if you are the only person on it.

You can try to convince all your contacts to switch away from whatever app is causing the most evil today, but you also have to convince all of your contacts’ contacts and all of theirs as well.

I think a lot of people assume they know what classic trek is about without even watching it. Hence the surprise when they realize that it’s “woke”.

They will have to go do 4 more shows up there just to break even.

Just some light treason.

If it is equal representation, why does having districts make the rural vote heard? Whether it is one person one vote or 100,000 people one vote it won’t make a difference.

Everyone will still have their representatives and senators to hear them. In fact I think we need to increase the number of representatives. It needs to be a number that a person can reasonably represent. Say 50 or 100 thousand people per representative. This would also help with gerrymandering as having a lot of small districts would make everyone’s voice louder.

But for national positions like the president, we should have proportional votes, preferably with getting rid of first past the post that got us stuck with the two party system to start with.

As a Washingtonian I also dream of that. It is ridiculous that only people in states that are kinda purple have their opinions heard.

I haven’t read the study, but most of these would need a placebo group, so divide the herd into thirds, one with no paint, one with stripes, and one fully painted white to get a baseline for each group. Also would be good to randomize which group each cow goes in each day so to rule out one cow who is especially tasty to flies.

My county in Washington state has a website where you can check the status. I even get text or email notifications for the status. “We received your ballot”, “the signature was verified”, “your vote has been counted”.

There was even a problem with my signature once and all I had to do was log in and verify it and it was counted.

You can even use this argument to avoid mowing the lawn.

If your router/firewall is configured to let these broadcasts through you have a problem. If it is working correctly and you have an attacker on your lan? You have already lost.

I would assume so. That would balance the people who live across the country from her.

Would Rankine not be an absolute?