If I wanted to read a summary of a lengthy and complex wikipedia article, I would just read the first few paragraphs. The summary is right there.
In fact, any use of AI for text summary is a bit suspect. Why wasn't the summary included by the authors in the first place? Any decent news article or scientific paper has one.
Getting stuck is part of the life. In my day job I get stuck every other day. Finding ways to get unstuck is part of the learning process, be it rereading the textbook, looking into other books or internet, coming up with novel ways how to approach the problem, ask classmates for advice, or just sleep on it.
And if all that fails, go find the teacher before the deadline and ask. Back in my day homework was never expected to be done the next day.
In any other profession this kind of farewell gift would have been seen as outright evil, but somehow in IT there are plenty of people sharing fantasies about how they would bring down their employers as if they own the place.
Imagine civil engineers planting bombs in bridges that would detonate upon termination of employment. Nobody sane would sympathise with that.
Many Americans educated in Germany will stay and add to the workforce.
Not when they already have US citizenship and can apply for jobs in the US. Pay is far, far, better in the US than it is in Europe. You'd be crazy to take a lower paying job, away from family, in a foreign country, just because that's where you got your degree.
Microsoft sucks so much at naming things. My workplace also requires Office support and it's confusing to no end. The things people want to do are office things, not microsoft things.
However, this happened years ago in in-app texts, splash screens, doc and help pages like this,
https://learn.microsoft.com/en...
and anywhere I look
This
Yeah I hate this change. Mom has Signal, Dad refuses, it was so nice not to care and have them both in one app. Stupid.
But the jarring price difference underscores just how out of whack drug prices have become in the U.S.
The jarring price difference come from the cost of R&D. The drug company is trying to recover all the money it spent developing the drug, getting it through human trials, and covering it's ass in case they get sued for missing a side effect. Mr. Oliff is just play for the cost of the raw materials. Pharmaceuticals are like software. Getting a high quality product without bugs / side-effects is hard. Making copies of the finished product is easy.
I know what Arvix is and isn't. What does this have to do with what I wrote?
I was simply correcting the false statement in the post that I replied to. As for their instruments and observations, I would recommend reading their paper. I have no opinion on that because I haven't read it
Except that the authors here are astronomers,
https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.112...
San Francisco gets a lot of conservative hate for a place so close to being an anarcho-capitalist experiment.
San Francisco gets a lot of conservative hate because it's the proving ground for many left wing policies. It's a high tax city, in a high tax state, with possibly the most left wing population in the country. And what do they have so show for all those taxes and left wing government programs? Not much.
That San Francisco has the same violent crime rates as Orlando Florida and Mobile Alabama in itself isn't noteworthy. What makes it noteworthy is that the left keeps pushing for similar policies across the country when the results show those policies just don't work. With the amount time, money, and effort being spent San Francisco it should be an exceptionally nice place to live. But it isn't. It's still no better off than Nashville, Orlando, Mobile, or a dozen other cities that, by comparison, have done little solve problems like crime and homelessness.
If Wallgreens wants to have a store on every block in the Tenderloin, then they will have to pay security guards enough to intervene and stop thefts in progress (stop relying on public resources—police—to run your business).
For decades the left has been saying we need to pay more tax so a bigger better government can solve these problems. And here you are saying "stop relying on public resources" to solve exactly those problems. If San Francisco was a business you'd be suing them for bait and switch.
The people aren't paying the insurance is paying for it. And at that price it makes sense whether your insurance is public or private. The current treatment costs $6.4M because they needs transfusions every two to five weeks for the rest of their life. So this will not only give people a better quality of live. But it will save their insurance company / government money as well.
"Only a brain-damaged operating system would support task switching and not make the simple next step of supporting multitasking." -- George McFry
