I second the request for videos. I'm primarily interested in the espresso machine and the lack of an end to end video will prevent me from giving it any really consideration.
Well I am not very good at empathy, indeed. Sorry.
But really. Teachers have complained about stupid or uninterested kids for ever. This does not make schools pointless. I am not good at teaching, but some people are, and manage to do it despite some setbacks. Is this AI thing really insurmontable? Did she at least attempt to fix the problem, before quitting?
Feels to me like "we've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas".
If you always start with heads the method works out. The key is that the first and the second toss need to be independent so that HT and TH have the same probability. If you influence the second toss based on the first one it no longer works.
Yeah, by mass. Look into the actual dollar numbers. It’s not economically viable to feed human-edible soy to cattle. There are much cheaper food sources. Cows just get the scraps (which outweigh the human-destined product). It’s not grown “for cattle” in the sense that cattle have essentially zero effect on the amount of soy that gets grown. https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/soy
This isn't true at all. The majority of soy produced all over the world is feed grade soy which isn't destined for human consumption.
Other than that I just can't find any sources that corroborate what you say. Every single source I could find that has actual numbers contradicts your statement.
Take the US for example
Just over 70 percent of the soybeans grown in the United States are used for animal feed, with poultry being the number one livestock sector consuming soybeans, followed by hogs, dairy, beef and aquaculture. The second largest market for U.S. soybeans is for production of foods for human consumption, like salad oil or frying oil, which uses about 15 percent of U.S. soybeans. A distant third market for soybeans is biodiesel, using only about 5 percent of the U.S. soybean crop.
> This isn't true at all. The majority of soy produced all over the world is feed grade soy which isn't destined for human consumption.
Yeah because that’s how soy beans work dude. I think there must be some miscommunication here - the majority of the harvested soy bean is physically not palatable to humans.
Perhaps you are misunderstanding what “70 percent of the soybeans” means. 70 percent of the harvested soy material is not salable to humans. It’s called “soy meal”, look it up. It’s not like if you count all the beans that get picked, 70% of them go to cows. Each harvest is mechanically separated into its component parts and shipped to different consumers, and only a minority of the mass is suitable for oil production or direct consumption.
No, this is not about the percentage of harvested material. I’m having trouble believing that you are having this exchange in good faith, so I’m gonna end this here.
And just so we don’t end this discussion with misinformation I’m gonna leave a final quote here:
About 85 percent of the world’s soybeans are processed, or "crushed," annually into soybean meal and oil. Approximately 98 percent of the soybean meal that is crushed is further processed into animal feed with the balance used to make soy flour and proteins.
Literally just google “soybean meal” and you’ll understand what they’re talking about. I feel like I’ve explained this pretty thoroughly. I can’t get my head around how you feel the need to conflate percent mass with percent quantity. Is there some language or conceptual barrier here?
There are definitely some things to be considered here, however I find that most people drastically overestimate the amount of work associated with hosting things.
Also they tend to underestimate the amount of work required when using managed solutions. For example, you'll certainly want to do secondary backups and test restores even for managed options.
It's interesting that the resulting go code has 43k lines of code, while the python client for raven only has 6k lines.
I don't know whether they have equivalent feature sets - but I kind of wonder how it would have turned out if the go port would have been based on the python version.
Python is a much more concise language. There are no brackets/parenthesis to surround blocks, that's 10% to 20% less lines just for that. A truckload of data classes and static declarations don't need to exist in python because of its very dynamic nature. Last but not least, python idioms like list comprehension and single line if else can replace a whole code block from another language.
Expect a python program to be half or a third of the size of java/c#/go.
Like with all languages the implementer matters. There's a remarkable amount of variance that I've encountered in the tersiness of both Go and Java code.
For example, Go's err != nil pattern is often cited as being ugly, but good go code will often remove errors by design.
This pattern is known in numerical computing as NaN. It’s drawback is that when the computation produces NaN, one has no idea what triggered it. But that can be mitigated if the program prints stack trace on the first NaN. In case of Go that corresponds to logging error when it happens.
Another thing is that in many cases there is no good sentinel value to return that naturally leads to exit from loops or complex logic to check for error at the end of a function.
Go error handling is a little bit more verbose, although I find it more readable and consistent than checked exceptions in Java, that everyone seems to find a way to abuse or ignore (wrap into catch all).
Go codebases do tend to be a little shorter due to lack of getters/setters... and generics are not used that often in production codebases anyway, relative to all the rest of typical code (that’s procedural anyway).
what do generics have to do with making it longer?
If you want to argue 'usually' then you could consider all the build scripts and XML files, class boilerplate and exception code of Java to be 'usually longer'.
I’m sure that’s a good chunk of it. Go also lacks list comprehensions, so you have a for loop instead. Go has more boilerplate, but not more complexity.
I learned about this as an adult and felt like such an idiot for going through school without learning the trick. And maybe a little mad at my third grade teacher.
Paper at a 45 degree angle + hand below the line I'm writing be works like a charm.
My introduction to rollerball pens forced me to learn how to do this, otherwise, I was smearing everything I had written. I did some research and found out that curling my hand around the pen was the wrong way to hold it.
If you haven’t tried them I’d suggest getting a set of panniers for grocery hauls (I’ve got the ortlieb backroller plus). We do most of our grocery shopping by bike and having panniers makes transporting larger quantities much easier.
I’m not quite sure I understand where the hot water is added, but I like not having a boiler.