Maybe try looking into the topic instead of confidently repeating your wrong assertions? You’re literally pulling a “my hand is not a number!” right now.
Just because you have a limited understanding of a unit, doesn’t mean that unit is only applicable to what you know. Literally the star example I brought up.
You say “we don’t think in bits because our brains function nothing like computers”, but bits aren’t strictly related to computers. Bits are about information. And since our brains are machines that process information, bits are also applicable to those processes.
To show this, I chose an analogy. We say that people have 10 fingers, yet our hands have nothing to do with numbers. That’s because the concept of “10” is applicable both to math and topics that math can describe, just like “bits” are applicable both to information theory and topics that information theory can describe.
For the record: I didn’t downvote you, it was a fair question to ask.
I also thought about a better analogy - imagine someone tells you they measured the temperature of a distant star, and you say “that’s stupid, you can’t get a thermometer to a star and read the measurement, you’d die”, just because you don’t know how one could measure it.
I also don’t have 10 fingers. That doesn’t make any sense - my hands are not numbers!
Ooooor “bits” has a meaning beyond what you assume, but it’s probably just science that’s stupid.
Have you ever seen Superman compliment someones hair?
Me neither.
If I can give you one piefe of advife: don’t put it on your tongue.
The title of an article isn’t meant to 100% precisely list all facts. It’s reasonable to assume readers are able to infer “Increasing testosterone levels [beyond normal levels] does not increase sex drive”.
Yes, that’s the subtitle of the article
Thank you for sharing your experience, those points are exactly what I’m worried about. Let’s hope the situation improves over the next couple of years!
Would you say the technology is developed far enough?
I’m definitely interested, as the phone screen size is often a bit too small. But any mechanical movement makes me nervous on a small device that should last multiple years.
What are you referring to by “OSI”? Not the 7 layer model, but that’s all I can find. It’s good to explain abbreviations when they’re not the most common usage of that abbreviation.
If they don’t have my contacts, they can’t spoof a number from my contacts. If they just spoof local numbers, the chance of them choosing one of my contacts is incredibly slim.
And how does a scammer get my contacts?
You just made me remember The Coma Machine.
One day I’ll figure out the meaning of the song. Real banger, but still don’t have a full picture. One day.
It would go to live leak with one crunch from a freaking leave, because horses are couches with an insatiable death wish. They’ll use every opportunity to gallop towards the void, and they’ll take as many of you with them as they can.
Why did many powerful and rich people support Brexit? Crises shake up existing ownership structures, e.g. people sell houses and companies for lower than usual to cover rising costs. If your investments are spread out globally, you’ll be able to invest at these cheap low points, giving you a massive boost once the economy comes back.
Just look at home ownership since the mortgage crisis - so much wealth was transferred up, and it happens again and again.
I’m not sure that it can be clearly delineated as a time loop or a causality loop, it’s honestly a mix of both - though you’d probably call it a causality loop, as each “instance of a person” only experiences the loop once.
Well yes, you didn’t get first ads. But what about second ads?
What about stories about time travel that ultimately form a closed loop? There’s one that has people moving forwards and backwards through time, yet forms a closed loop at the end: >!Dark!<
I’m aware, it was mostly a joke about these “features” making Notepad worse. Nevertheless, thank you :)
IIUC USB-C puts less mechanical stress on the port and more on the cable connector, so instead of the port breaking the cable should break.
Circular connectors wouldn’t be backwards-compatible either, and would be much harder to manufacture at the size of USB-C. I actually can’t think of circular connectors with more than 2 data channels that can be plugged in in any rotation - do you have an example? All the ones I can think of (PS/2, XLR) have a set orientation.
Ah, so you just choose to ignore information you don’t already know? What a rational thing to do. You’re not anti-intellectual at all.
Or are you seriously trying to gaslight everyone into believing Shannon entropy doesn’t exist?