Scipitie

joined 9 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

Haha brainfart. Thought about lan domains...

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Who should do this vetting though? The internet was built up with the idea of technical neutrality - everything else came on top. TLDs came later and were used to either describe the origin of a page or its intended(!) use. That leads to the case that not only can a propaganda outlet mark itself as "info" - it's actually historically correct to do so as it's about what the host wants to communicate.

ICANN, the organisation behind the TLDs, actually always struggles with this btw. A more recent example was the decision which domain should be reserved for local name services. It took y long time (I think years overall) to get to: .internal (edited, brainfart)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Would you mind telling the source of this? Looks intuitively right but... So do so many things :/

[–] [email protected] 77 points 1 week ago (24 children)

At home, in private lodgings and dedicated smoking areas.

This is one thing once more which would be a non issue if it weren't for the people who throw their stubs everywhere and blow smoke in the faces of others.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

Hm I was clearly wrong, I apologize! The excuse is that I was really tired and already quite "clickbait state of mind" ish.

Thank you for taking the time to write this! ♥

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Yes. And the "survivors" don't have a say in that if the person itself said otherwise before dying.

Training future doctors is a good cause and will most likely save lives in a similar fashion to donating a heart after all.

Edit: I removed a wrong part here claiming that the article is clickbait. I was off by a mile, see the reply to this post as to why.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks! I know jack shit about this sport but find the simulation interesting.

Two things especially:

  • the probability jump when each day is calculated (going actually backwards) and
  • a 100% outcome prediction even for the 40/40 reached basically in the last two days.

These two in combination make me think that the model seems to be set for an optimistic pattern, is that a reasonable deduction?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Well those do grant a "mature content" rating. Insert "not like this" meme

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Plus the brain probe tingling exactly the right spots!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh sorry, nvidia RTX :) Thanks!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Lowest price on Ebay for me is 290 Euro :/ The p100 are 200 each though.

Do you happen to know if I could mix a 3700 with a p100?

And thanks for the tips!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Hey, I like the initiative of sharing this!

One major point stood out to me. When reading CVs I try to match the statements with the experiences. I didn't manage to map them. Example: you improve processes - when and where?

Either adjust the statement to the stations or vice versa. For every statement you should have a recent backing.

The second thing is the title part: this will be very hot or miss depending on the reader. Either way I recommend putting explanation and title either in one paragraph or very close together. If this would've need on my desk and I'd be in stress I wouldn't have read beyond it just because it looked like an isolated joke going directly into the serious next block.

Hope this helps!

view more: next ›