Nothing could be easier.
Nothing could be easier.
To properly understand sarcasm requires a very high level of understanding of the language, the situation being commented on, and human nature. The current levels of AI would only be able to understand context-free phrases like "Yeah, right" as sarcasm and maybe guess at others. Of course, sometimes sarcasm is also indistinguishable from sincerity, either on purpose or due to the speaker's incompetence, and even more so on the internet (Poe's Law).
Everyone knows that when you want to manipulate elections, you make large anonymous campaign contributions. And to manipulate public sentiment, have a couple guys own all the news media, and you can each do favors for each other. This way everything is legit.
It may simply be that different people are differently motivated to win. For example, if someone were offered $1 million if they win, but their opponent were offered only $1, I'd expect the one with the higher stake to both be more likely to win by skill or effort, and be more likely to cheat to win. This should be even more so if the more motivated person has been allowed more time to practice -- like perhaps a lifetime of really liking to win. Other people might only play for fun (teammates in highly competitive games hate such people) -- trying new/different strategies, spending less time thinking on their turn. Or worse, some people might have been playing merely because they got paid to do it for the study.
Similarly, reminding someone that they are a winner would serve as some motivation to win again.
Grammer ignorami. Proper nouns should NEVER be preceded by articles.
Oh, the definite article is very commonly used before proper nouns, most often place names or geographical features (e.g. "The Mississippi (River)").
Sometimes "the" is used purely customarily (particularly in names translated from other languages like "The Ukraine" or "The Maghreb" ), but its primary function is to distinguish between nouns referring to specific things a speaker is expected to be aware of, and generic things that are just being introduced into the discourse: "a ball [which I haven't mentioned up until now] broke Mr. Smith's window; Mr. Smith kept the ball [which I just mentioned]."
In particular proper nouns which sound like they might be generic will sometimes customarily get a "the" tacked on to indicate the audience is expected to picture the well-known thing rather than some unknown one ("The United States", "The Great Lakes", "The Big Easy"). "The Donald" is a definite article usage of this type, with an bit of ironic deprecation mixed in.
By the way the plural of "ignoramus" is "ignoramuses", not "ignorami". That is because "ignoramus" was never a noun in Latin; rather it is a conjugation of the verb ignorare (to be unacquainted with, to ignore). "Ignoramus" entered English as a legal term to mean "we take no notice of" (e.g. a witness whose testimony is irrelevant because he has no firsthand knowledge).
Isn't decentralized internet really messy?
Facebook wants to spy on people who don't have internet access, too. Wouldn't want them to feel left out.
If you killing yourself would mean I'd see the acronym "SJW" less often on Slashdot, then by all means go right ahead.
How enlightened of you.
like so many other tech people, I'd worry about my email provider being controlled by the Chinese.
I'd worry more about email controlled by America. If nothing else at least the Chinese don't care what I do over here.
Maybe you need a closer look at what mobile OSs are like.
"This paper has virtually zero substance."