From experience, accuracy is more important, for typing what you mean to type, so you avoid hard-to-discover bugs. Touch typing can help you optimize movement, to avoid typos, and avoid rewind/redo when you spot typos. Whether touch typing is essential also depends on what proportion of your time you spend typing. For example, for research and analysis, or docs, there's more time thinking than typing. Note-taking is where touch typing becomes more useful, so you can record more info in real-time, and do it more accurately.

I expect this leads to a prominent call-to-action sales pitch for Surface. Like with 'Your computer does not meet the requirements for Windows 11'.

In cooling the cables, their conductivity will increase, resistance decrease [1], and so less heat will be generated in the cables. Unless this has been taken into account, the (re)generation benefits might be overstated by a simple sampling at one point. However, the transmission will be more efficient. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Two more will replace the one you removed.

If it's purely a timing error, projected into 2D or 3D space, then for a number of variables having an evenly-distributed (or normal) error, most of the resulting positions will be 'far away'. For example, if you create a 7x7 grid, with yourself in the center square, and pick one of the 49 squares randomly, only 1/49 is correct, another 8/49 are within 1 distance, another 20/49 are within 2 distance, and so on, because the number of squares available increases for any given distance.

I tend to use O(n) for assessing scalability, rather than for assessing bsolute suitability, which can usually be assessed when testing the quick/easy solutions. If you know the likely value of 'n' as the point when you plan to maintain the solution again, and know that the algorithm will perform acceptably, then that's OK. The real-life test is knowing when the algorithm will take too long to run, and planning for it by putting in a proportionate development effort.

Occam's Razor please! It's most likely to be the absorption of a star-scale body, or occlusion by fast-moving matter.

New abstraction at a well-chosen part of a stack may result in better general functionality, but there's a risk that the calling code then becomes less readable, takes more skill to write, or takes a performance hit. Do you have a good example of how you decided a case for abstraction?

You glance sideways at an organisation, and inwardly sigh. Why? Is there a common pattern? (A very open question; we might get surprise answers)

Yes, that would be more accurate :o]

This makes sense in the Apple ecosystem. It speeds up web browsing and streamlines the experience, and if ads are blocked at browser or OS level, it gives Apple a chance to create their own approved ad market. I think it's a step too far to assume that they can insert unintended content arbitrarily into a web page or existing ad slot.

Many entities that seem to exceed light speed, are in fact multiple entities exhibiting a change in measurable state, in sequence, which looks like a single object. Take the example of a Mexican Wave: we can set up a large one, that seems to move faster than the speed of light along the crowd, but no single person exceeds light speed. Likewise, one may take the interference pattern between two combs, and make the highlights and shadows move faster than light speed. None of these examples break causality rules.

[warning: armchair comment] Looks like a leakage problem, degrading the cells, so reads must be retried sub-optimally. The fix would be for the drive to re-write/re-allocate old cells, which could become a maintenance task that does not noticeably degrade live performance nor lifespan. However, this does limit the drive's use as a portable or offline drive, where this maintenance cannot be performed routinely.

This will likely cost a lot to use: a competitive market for 'transactions' and licensing. Imagine each segment or corridor of airway being owned and sublet by someone who sets transit pricing. Imagine the licensing process itself being regulated like domain names. It's likely to be better if regulated exclusively by a central authority, on a not-for-profit basis.

Learning and intelligence are defined by the experience of having a body, so perspectives (AI/human) will be different. Also, lifespans and context might present difficulties. Some of this, and other issues are in "The T3 Report" (short fiction) http://johnvalentine.co.uk/fic...