Their money is mostly stored in regulated and insured banks and investments. Even if you get their bank password, you can't just move all their money at once to an untraceable account in an irreversible transaction leaving them with absolutely no recourse.
> the ones making nests near urban areas were incorporating a lot of colorful man-made trinkets they scavenged from the big city to woo the ladies (which I think suggests some level of flexibility).
If they avoided man-made objects, that would indicate that they're smart enough to tell the difference. They're just grabbing any object they find that stands out. If anything, that implies less intelligence.
By these rules, you just committed an attack and violated the rights of others by saying "88". If you were banned to prevent this attack, nothing of value would be lost.
Oh, "but I wasn't SAYING it" you say? Who judges whether hate speech is excused by context? Facebook interns? AI algorithms? Sorry, the algorithm has pronounced you guilty, you are now banned.
Reminds me of "100 Great Science Fiction Short Short Stories" edited by Asimov. The format works really well for hard sci-fi, gets straight to the point. Some of them have stuck with me for decades.
If it was "promise" in the sense of "showing promise", then it's a mass noun and they wouldn't have said "a promise". That's like saying "a money" or "a knowledge".
That was actually mentioned in Nintendo Power volume 50, it's one of the most well-known and easy-to-perform video game glitches.
They also mentioned the Zelda 2 glitch where you could wrong-warp by jumping off the top of the screen and using the Fairy spell. You could get into a weird town that didn't exist, and if you left you were stuck in the middle of the ocean.
Some of these are poorly worded. Why does the answer to the May one keep talking about 30 seconds passing when the only time mentioned in the problem is 30 minutes? 30 seconds gives Nick at least 10 seconds per possible solution, he should have tried them all by then.
It should talk about the number of tries so far (one each), the length of time it took is irrelevant. But why are they even taking turns when they have separate padlocks and could easily brute-force it? I get the concept they're going for but the premise doesn't fit and just confuses things.
It wouldn't need to involve cognition and logic, it could be evolutionary coincidence: humpback whales with behavior that happens to result in fewer orcas nearby would have more surviving offspring, so this behavior would be selected for.
No, it would require them to add their cert on the intended machines under their control. The only reasons they would need the trust of all browsers and OS's are subterfuge and laziness. They should not be globally trusted to issue certificates.
Officially branded Tetris games are required to use a "random bag" algorithm where they generate random permutations of the 7 tetrominos, so that for every 7 pieces (aligned with the bag start) you get each type once. You can only get two in a row if they appear at the end of one bag and the start of the next, and conversely there's a maximum of 12 pieces between duplicates (start of one bag, end of the next). Three in a row will never happen.
> People may not always feel comfortable checking into a local bar or sharing an anecdote from their lives, knowing these updates may not be relevant to all their connections.
Google Plus solved this exact problem 5 years ago with "circles", letting you choose what to share with which groups of "friends". Why hasn't Facebook implemented this?
What black hole are you sending JSON into where the only way they could know something is a date is if you use a date type? Why can't that be part of the data structure you agreed upon in order to communicate in the first place?
It's mostly in German, but each game page usually has a rules section in English and links to other sites with the same puzzle type.