zoomablemind

Reads like a teaser to a thriller. I just wonder what is that he saw that night?

Like the "monolith" scene from the Kubrick's Odissey

Surprised to find that Tera Term is still actively supported and has recent releases.

I knew it as a nice and simple term emulator from quite some years back. Though Windows only still.

One needs also understand the facts, not just cite them.

All of the names you cited, Lukash, Lebedev, Ilyin were appointed by Yanukovich and indeed were working for his government.

That is Ilyin was attempting to deploy military units against the civilian protesters already being suppressed by AK-47 armed police forces.

No, the military did not try to stage a coup. It was russia-serving Yanukovich that was using every unlawful measures to stay in power, including the attempt to deploy the military units to suppress the Maidan civilian protesters.

As for the foreign interference, cherry-picking the references can't hide the outcome, as the Crimea and Donbas region were directly invaded by russian military and paramilitary units, following up with illegal annexation declaration.

Will see how the other companies would react to this. I'd guess, they would enforce the notion of "recommendation" to whitewash the outright collusion.

Being irrational number, there are no finite number of digits (e.g. in decimal form or other base) to represent the pi value exactly. Nor can such value be expressed as ratio of integers.

Likewise, in your representation the ellipsis hides away the infinity.

Perhaps you could share that exact value with the rest of humanity. And I mean the number value, not the nominal value.

It appears that we cannot precisely measure circle length/area in units of radius and vice versa. Basically, the unity as such does not exist in our knowledge, nor can we truly comprehend infinity.

Perhaps, unity and infinity are just our abstractions for something else.

How many times researchers go find article PDF on notnamed site, then print it for reading and annotating, just as one would do with a copy from a printed journal.

Take a picture of a hand drawn diagram and just paste the image.

Sure it's not vectored but wiki is, well, quick wiki-wiki.

Wasting cycles in already not-so-sure brains is not a practical way to gain confidence.

Having a code that works, boosts the novice's confidence greatly.

Review would help the novice get better. Just be practical in dispensing the review comments - gaining proficiency needs time, trial and error.

There is a good enough advice for any level of the novice, no need to try to mold the novice into a pro in one shot.

The most critical - make sure the novice understands the task they are to solve. And also they should have freedom and a way to declare that they got stuck and need help.

You could explore the Fossil's Forum or Wiki way for the notes. This offers the built in editor and some versioning too all without the need to do 'add/remove'.

This is when the PM does not have practical knowledge of existing obstacles to the project flow or the implications of external dependencies (intra team included).

This is a set up for throwing the team under the bus in case the schedule derails.

PM is supposed to harmonize the objectives and abilities, not manufacture the curves.

In case of old media, I think their historical value is not in their own existence but in their effect on people of the time.

Older movies were perceived back in time through the old technology, that is b/w, small screen, choppy, silent or with musical accompaniment.

It's a document, similar to language dialects used back in time - localizing this for present time would shave away the cultural skin it had for its time.

You're talking about the product. The TFA is about the process.

Creating something that becomes successful needs more than just a chance, it needs inspiration, skill, discipline, and some sustainable process.

It needs trust and practical receptiveness. That is, opposite to perfectionism and self-imposed drive for originality.

Thanks for the link!

All of the experiment "participants" must have Lucky in their middle names. They managed to keep their jobs over those 20 years and kept their cool at the economy downturns.

They only Buy (the index shares), except for the one that keeps "cash" aka money market shares. I guess they plan on doing this beyond the 20y, why stop feeding cash into the account, why retire when it can contnue growing?

Lucky ones will also retire in upturn.

Yet the whole transaction needs the Sell part to realize the gains. Surprisingly, the Schwab experiment did not model this for the "participants".

Does one need to "time" the Sells?

"Increasing efficiency" is mostly a theater meant to demonstrate effort during low/no growth periods and without viable products in development to validate such dynamic.

These orgs are not truly functioning per market principles, yet for various reasons are stuck in a captive energy state that no one dares to disturb.

It could be a niche product sold out to big orgs or other steady clients. It could be a subsidiary or some other steady org. Either way, there is no market pressure to really push such orgs to adapt.

Thus all this theater and moldy props. These orgs are not expected to improve, they will live, but required to demonstrate an effort.

This reminds me of some shitty restaurants or deserted "boutique" storefronts which stay in business for decades with no suply-demand explanation for such longevity. I guess, these may somehow have low operating costs and some strong funding source.

Your colleague, well, maybe you as well, could instead make use of 'git worktree'

https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree

It allows exactly that, use a single repo yet have parallel checkouts in separate directories.

Film always presented a new frame from the canister, so reasonably it would be free of dust for capture.

With such open sensor the dust accumulation may soon become an issue.

I would rather not follow a car like that on the road, hell, even driving by it.

The looks don't signal the intent. Guess what will it do next when either light starts blinking, or both? There is no known signal for kicking on the jet engine! From the back it looks like a gigantic cannon too, BeachBuggyRacing kind.

Just for kicks, I'd also put a "Student Driver" decal on the rear window :).

It's hard to figure out how to use the features other than just tweaking the generated waveforms.

How to measure anything?

Tried to use Mic as source, the whole thing gets unresponsive and needs a reload. It's in Firefox, Ubuntu.

Also, no sound output when Monitoring is On.

Here are some "discoveries":

- key C (calib) opens a test panel with additional buttons. Selecting Preset2 displays some funny figure. Other Presets are fun too.

- key F (frames) shows red bounding boxes on all controls

-key D (debug) shows some information in Developer console, then needs reload

P.S. Selecting Mic as source throws an exception:

"Uncaught TypeError: navigator.getUserMedia is not a function" in getUserAllow

Indeed! Here it is in brief from another article on the subject

"...Leonardo’s rule [for how trees branch] says that the thickness of a limb before it branches into smaller ones is the same as the combined thickness of the limbs sprouting from it."

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/leonardo-da-vinci-rule-t...

?? Sports

There's obviously a question of interest, skill, time. Still, there are sports choices out there, pickup games, leagues etc.

Does not guarantee finding a friendship but at least provides a context.

The deal here is that both versions are fairly readable, written by someone with intent to make it clear what the code should be doing. As a result the two versions are just examples of two expression styles, while the focus is on showing how the transition between these styles could be done.

What's worth underscoring here is the cohesiveness of stretches of code, such that their execution could be summarized by a descriptive function name.

Often in grand god-functions the contexts are so intertwined and mixed that it is hard to see cohesiveness in stretches of code.

Thus, the refactoring is very much a tool to creating such cohesiveness and proper logical sequencing.

Scooping out the code into separate function or commenting it out is more of a style judgement. Though putting the code into a function with a descriptive name indeed enforces this sort of analysis.

Of course, there's curriculum to chart the courses. Yet it's still up to you to explore the tangents, see the common sides, map your existing knowledge onto another domain.

I wish I could see more beyond course requirements and homeworks. It helps when professors could also draw such parallels, especially in applied sciences.