Sadly the teacher is correct unless you plan to give your son a great inheritence he will need to purchase cars, rent places, and even buy a home some day.
The teacher is claiming, specifically, that not paying off credit cards increases your credit score. This is wrong. It has nothing to do with budgeting, or leasing, or mortgages. It's about building credit via using credit cards.
The Meta Quest series of VR headsets have something similar to this where you can be "in the round" so to speak or watch from an audience perspective. Some of it is free, some of it is paid if I'm not mistaken.
Page 2, Figure 1.1, "parallel connection". See the lack of an EMF in that diagram?
Yes, now see the text directly under the diagram which says, and I quote, "Things hooked in parallel (Figure 1.1) have the same voltage across them.". So no the source of the EMF is not shown but it is clearly there as the text underneath states. Thank you for proving my point.
OKey dokey, since you keep dodging this question I'll ask again.
The line you quoted answers the question you asked: if the current does not divide between two or more paths then the devices are not connected in parallel. Apply that to your situation: if there is a current and it splits to pass through two devices you have a parallel circuit. If not, you do not. It's literally that simple. Apply that simple rule to whatever ideas you come up with and it will tell you if it's connected in parallel. It's not pedantic, it's simple and easy and the definition of a parallel circuit. Switches break circuits and so yes, it should not be a surprise to someone who has Horowitz & Hill on their shelf that they can change whether something is connected in parallel. In fact it's really easy to imagine using switches to convert a parallel circuit to a series circuit.
The C++ standards committee abandoned a detailed proposal to create a rigorously safe subset of the language, according to the proposal's co-author, despite continuing anxiety about memory safety.
Article at Le Monde (in French): “The C++ standards committee rejected a proposal to create a secure subset of the language. Members prefer to focus on the Profiles framework pushed by C++ creator Bjarne Stroustrup.” https://www.lemondeinformatiqu...
"If you mark your code to apply a Profile, some features of the C/C++ language will stop working," he says. There is also a small problem, these guidelines were not integrated into version 26 of C++, but simply into a white paper. The controversy surrounding the security of C++ opens the door to another solution with the use of another language. The first advocated by several American authorities is Rust, but there is also Google's experimental Carbon project. Unveiled in 2022, it also aims to modernize C++.
If Profiles are eventually adopted, it may Balkanize C++ by dividing C++ into safe and unsafe subsets. C++ Profiles won't fix the issue of making C pointers memory safe. A proposal to implement pointer memory safety is TrapC, but for the C language, not C++. Some say make the switch to Rust, but that doesn't solve the safety problems lurking in billions of lines of existing C/C++ code.
I wonder which religion would win out when the code is written by DeepSeek?
Unfortunately for the vi-faithful it's going to be emacs because it can actually run DeepSeek.
But will it?
Yes. Name one main-stream science, engineering or medical degree from a decent university that was not helpful in getting a job 10, 20 or even 30 or more years ago.
A system which was once useful has basically become a ponzi scheme which serves no real purpose other than making colleges richer.
No it has not. What has happened though is that you now have a lot of for-profit private colleges setup to rip people off without providing them with a decent, or even useful, education. You also see established institutions suffering from government funding cutbacks adding some programs that prioritise profit over education. You are also starting to see institutes starting to prioritise social issues over education. However, the basic value proposition of university is still very much there it's just that, like many things in today's world, social and financial pressures are corrupting it in some instances.
Now all that knowledge is widely available to anyone on the Internet
That's a nice idea but I've yet to meet anyone with e.g. a good grasp of physics who achieved that by teaching themselves from the internet. I have met several people who _think_ they have a good grasp of physics from teaching themselves but invariably they have gone off the rails somewhere because it's easy to misunderstand or misread things when teaching yourself and you need to have someone challenging and correcting those misunderstandings when they occur as well as checking that you have reached certain standards. There are very good reasons why we do not let someone just read a lot of medical texts and then start practicing as a doctor.
In computing, the mean time to failure keeps getting shorter.
