But, really, it should be: !w || !x so that read-only, no-execute access is also valid.
Truth Table for this expression:
X | F | T
_W__|___|___
_F__|_T_|_T_
_T__|_T_|_F_
So NAND really and not XOR?
It sure is a good thing that players' behavior as modeled in games has no effect whatsoever on their offline behavior, or in any way informs us about their attitudes toward the real world. That might be disconcerting.
That is not the interesting part. The players behavior might not match their offline behavior, but it does match the offline behavior of some politicians.
Apple wouldn't stop supporting devices that still count for 60% of their own statistics.
No, they just do that with those under 40%.
While it is absolutely the case that emoji has no place in certain text fields, as a web browser it is Chrome's responsibility to handle all valid and compliant UTF-8 symbols, including emoji symbols, within the application. Emoji are not some imaginary pseudo-symbol type or image format sent in-line. Where the symbol is seen, an image from a font will be displayed instead of a conventional character. As such, is it really that different than needing to support Cyrillic characters in text fields?
It was already working. This was just allowing Chrome to use the color fonts for Emoji on Mac. They were already supporting color fonts on Linux.
Are you high?
While your posts sounds great you really need to cut down on the drug, man.
Nature is not a person and neither is science, and they get really pissed off then you treat them as such.
It's kind of the paradox of democracy -- how do you square the rights of a free society against those would use those rights to advocate against them or overthrow them?
You ignore their words and punish them for their actions. If they have a majority you probably shouldn't have a democracy.
PKH is a great man most of the time, but when he is wrong or fell overlooked, he is indistinguishable from a troll.
I like the fact IETF keeps this revision simple. The last thing we need is something overengineered that will never be implemented fully.
Not possible.
You need more than a 5% edge over the other players, because for every hand you win, the house is going to take a small cut, and for every hand you lose the house will take a small cut from other players. If there is not a big sucker at the table, the players will leave and look for a better game. Thery are not going to sit around dying a slow death of small rakes to the casino. And if you can't spot the sucker, it's you.
This must be without a house. If it is optimal then two of them should get a draw, and break even. That is not possible if anyone takes a cut.
In this case it is. It is an investment that pays of more than it costs. It in fact better than free, especially since borrowing money right now is free for the government.
Recently I noticed that Texas Hold'em is only half of the game. The betting is the real strategic part. Unless the bot can do this well, I don't it will ever really "beat" a human player.
If it can beat the game and win more time that it loses by simply playing chances optimally (or force a draw), then it can basically get the same benifits as the house; always winning over time.
I didn't think that would be possible with Poker, and would love to see that in practice, but it is what they claim.
That is why it is limit poker. Besides all games have limits acknowledged or not.
Think of the robot as the house, it might not win everytime but it always wins in the long run.
From what I understand, thunderbolt is essentially an external PCIe interface. That's inherently insecure. It was bad enough that Firewire gave devices DMA access, but with PCIe it will probably be 10x worse.
Not bad for a desktop (assuming you don't encrypt your disks either), but a terrible idea on a laptop, and especially if you support encryption out the box. What is the point of encryption when you give even faster access to unencrypted memory with a convinient external port?
Web apps don't count, have never counted, and never will count. That's why Apple deigned to allow people to write real apps -- something they adamantly did not want to allow when the iPhone was first released.
The iPhone was designed to only support web-apps. It was only iPhone2 that opened up for native apps after consumer and developer pressure.
No 90 is maximum. Running them at that temperature will reduce their lifespan, hurt other parts of the laptop, and if it is thin burn you if you touch it. Lower is better.
Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. -- Ambrose Bierce
