I'll second this. The upper echelon of 5v5 is an entirely different game. It's similar to what was alluded in the post[1] about chess in another thread. The level of complexity is so high and the depth of refinement is so technical that generic statistics just don't quantify the conclusions we draw from simply watching someone's FPV. One would need to start by analyzing data at the most basic level: did the player move between two points as efficiently as possible without penalty or mistakes? How far away was their crosshair from where it needed to be at the point of contact for each engagement? How often did they misjudge where everyone else was? How accurate are they at timing enemy movement to another location without seeing them? What is their level of consistency at making certain well-known plays at certain locations? These are just the basics. The game-world data is available though for analysis at this level of detail.
As an anecdote, my neighbor is a crazy asshole who started blasting music and having parties at random hours; it can be problematic for sleep and productivity. Police in California are inept at stopping this. Will the company pay to send lawyers or do I have to waste my own time and money to pick up and move my whole life for something worse to be waiting at the next rental?
Former long time renter here. I had the same problem with neighbors in an adjacent apartment complex, and police couldn't do a damned thing except come out at 4 am and tell me, yep, we can hear that from the street.
I mentioned the problem to the landlord. The landlord told me to report it to the public health department. I did.
I never heard back from the health department, but the noise stopped within a few days, and the stereo blasting tenant and their onsite manager glared at me ever time I saw them afterwards.
I've never owned a microwave, instead I air-fry everything. Pretty sure this is the same trick restaurants use, especially fast-food ones. Microwaves make soggy leftovers.
No way is it faster. I can heat a bowl of soup up in 1 minute in the microwave. The pot is barely heated up after 1 minute in the stove, much less the contents.
Maybe it depends on the equipment. My stove can heat soup much faster than my microwave. Not to mention in the microwave you have to constantly stir to make sure it’s not still cold in the middle, because a microwave doesn’t heat evenly.
My guess is that it is a difference in volume. While a microwave is very efficient at exciting water in food, the range top is putting out a _lot_ of heat based on a 220V (in US) electric source or natural gas source.
This point is of the utmost importance from a public policymaking perspective. Laws such as these are easy to craft now and difficult to change later. I feel like we are previewing an unfolding disaster here.
The future will clearly yield a class of "beings" striving for some degree of indistinguishability from or coexistence with humans. Proposals that discriminate --literally discriminate -- without respect for the principles of universality and equal treatment under law are creating and condemning a marginalized group before it even reaches maturity. This is an old and tired theme repeated through history. Let's foresee this and not get it wrong.
US Marines are trained to make their bed with military speed and precision as the first thing they do each morning. If one can't do that little thing how can one accomplish everything else with military speed and precision for the rest of the day?
It makes more sense if you think of it in terms of identifying risk.
Rather than, "a marine who doesn't make their bed with precision is incapable of precision," think of it as "a marine who doesn't make their bed with precision is experiencing problems that could prevent them from acting with precision in more important situations."
That does sound plausible but I do know. When I come across suchlike justifications for petty rules, I rather tend to feel there's some kind of petty control frreakery behind it. Then again I have no military experience.
Requiring them to make their beds doesn't strike me as unreasonably petty, and to the extent that they do make soldier follow petty rules it's often done with a purpose, usually to install obedience. Not that there aren't lots of dicks in the military, but you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the way organisations do things because often there's a good reason.
Doing nothing your entire life but killing grazing animals and wearing their fur on your shoulders and teeth around your neck is just man a few thousand years removed.
An effect of the establishment and growth of communism, subsequently its counterpart emergence of capitalism, and the growing culture of excess materialism ... called wealth.
Ok? My research on this is capitalism was never coined until Marxism was coined. Marxism is the predecessor to communism. Communism was taken up during the Bolshevik revolution. Then it was demonized.
The term capitalism was never coined or used before Marxism. You could find ideals and concepts that were adopted by the capitalist movement such as laissez-faire. But these were independent concepts separately developed.
Technically correct, but capitalist and capital were both in use before Marx. In any case it’s certainly more correct that Marxism is a response to capitalism, rather than the inverse.
When Karl Marx wrote his book, it was in response to the aristocracy and bourgeois owning majority of the resources. He proposed resources be distributed amongst the people in service of the people or “working class” and proposed government take on this role.
Capitalism was termed and grouped together in response to Marxist philosophy because it was a threat to the aristocracy. Capitalism proposed anyone and everyone can get rich if they slave away hard enough. Yet the “capitalists” still owned much of the capital resources.
It is important to note that the normal person did not have too much opportunity in the mid 1800s. If you seen the movie the “English Game” this is evident in there. The concept of working hard and getting rich was introduced in the early 20th century. This is also about the time when schooling had become compulsory throughout the United States.
Ah, I think we might be talking about different things when we talk about capitalism.
I’m using the word to describe an economic system where the means of production are controlled by private capital (ie: capitalists). In such a system, capitalists are able to deploy capital to exploit the labor value of the working classes. This is what Marxism emerged in response to, and as I understand it, is what Marx attempts to describe in Capital.
It seems you’re using the term the way American/NATO Cold War propagandists used it, to describe a free economy where anyone can succeed with enough hard work and determination (in contrast to the Soviet system of planned economies).
The confusion is understandable. The word “capitalism” covers both meanings in everyday use.
Interesting. I didn’t think there were two different meanings. I’m heavily influenced my Cold War propagandist. I’m going to have to re-study Marxist philosophy from this new perspective.
If one of the variables preceding the `if` has side-effects then it's inferior to the specified lazy-evaluation of the `if`. Any external function not annotated pure will be called to assign those variables which otherwise wouldn't have been if it was packed into the `if`.
This is actually something I think the C++ standard should address soon. There are cases when extern functions which aren't appropriately pure are still "optional." The example par excellence is debug logging, should one choose to not use macros.
While I wouldn't be surprised to see some proactive PR from the company in the wake of recent events, perhaps including the post on the zkSNARK competition last month; which was in my humble opinion one of the few submissions that has truly moved me since the late 2000's on this site:
I feel obliged to attest that the people I knew working at Jane Street at that time were some of the straightest shooters one could know. My anecdote is that SBF's toxicity didn't originate in their culture. Perhaps it was a counteraction to it, if anything.
Where can I find information about how the German government came to this decision? Does this involve contracts to outside companies for development and consulting or will that all be done by the government? If the former, when and where did the bidding process take place? What alternatives were considered? I don't speak German, so I need some help understanding this. Precise links would be appreciated.
What angle is in your question? Matrix is the best choice i could imagine. And the lobbyists of Google, Microsoft and Apple surely had better funding than anyone touching matrix.
If your ask whether a consulting agency earned something between 10 and 100 million on that decision you are most likely right. But I guess overall it was probably the CCC influence on the politics and the population. The club and their members are much more influential than you would expect.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40330923