The second sentence explains it perfectly fine to a layperson, and anyone used to interpreting plots has no real problem even without the supplied explanation. The only points of confusion for someone unfamiliar with the different models are the are the labels.
This is mainly because institutions and systems that used to teach people how to do wisdom are lost. Modern age has information and tools to process it, but not the methods and practices to deal with bias and self-delusion,
Perhaps those railing against high schools, colleges, and even post-graduate education, need to go back and deal with their *own* biases and self-delusions. The institutions and systems are there.
[...] Which seems to infer that the majority would be capable of achieving high marks in college as well.
"imply"
I see you're trying to post a dupe on
We helped our uncle, Jack, off a horse.
Out of curiosity, I opened the web version (https://teams.microsoft.com/v2/, in Firefox 144.0, on Mint 22.2, using Cinnamon 6.4.8 on a Beelink mini-desktop). To make the usual "test call", I can't go to three-dots (...)--> Settings --> Calls --> Devices (there is no "Devices" under THAT version of "Calls"). However, I CAN go to the "Calls" menu on the far left of the window --> Custom Setup (gear menu) --> Device Settings, and then do a Test Call.
From there, all works fine, including sound and video. Of course, all my Sound Input/Output devices work OK in the OS itself....
I used Firefox (not sure of what the version was) to successfully hold Teams meetings on the web on Mint (likely ~20 or 21), and Vivaldi on a different Mint system. I'm sorry I can't remember more. It was 6 months ago or so.
I'm right now trying out Zorin OS, this could be an alternative for some since it has a look similar to Windows.
But is there a version of Teams for Linux?
I have a couple of people I *can* "upgrade" to W11 from W10, but I think they're ideal candidates to move to Zorin or Mint.
MS used to supply a desktop client of Teams for LInux, but hasn't for a year or more at this point. However, the web interface works well enough. And if you don't mind snaps on your system, you can try wrapping the web interface in a sort of desktop app: https://snapcraft.io/teams-for...
Hoping that the Democrats learn to read the room, and abandon some of the far left ideas they've incorporated, and produce electable candidates. Hoping the Democrats become a party of ideas, not a party of "When we want your opinion, we'll tell you what it is."
[...]
None of this is living in my head rent free - only takes a little time to suss out the issues. I write, maybe troll a little, then go about my day.
Cute, even with the unironic discussion of irony self-contradiction.
The booster has worked property through stage separation on all but the first launch, and has had 8 landing attempts that would have been successful apart from things like GSE problems or extreme descent profiles meant to push its limits. The final 3 block one starhips made it to near-orbit successfully and survived reentry to splashdown. The initial block 2 starships had some trouble, but the final three all made it to near-orbit and the last two both survived reentry and splashed down successfully.
You have to keep in mind that this is a development project and they are improving the design with each test flight, they're not just failing over and over again, or having a small number of successful flights at random. Even the block three ships are not the final planned ideration. SpaceX intends to mass produce these, and fly them at an incredible rate. If you think about other things that are mass produced, like cars, they make tons of prototypes and release candidates before they settle on the final version and tool up to mass produce it. What SpaceX is doing with Starship is no different. They really want it to be as inexpensive and reliable as possible. It's nothing like any space development project that's come before.
I'm always looking for a new idea that will be more productive than its cost. -- David Rockefeller
