It seems that approach is a way to generate losses without actually losing the titles. These losses are needed to offset incomes elsewhere thus not paying taxes on profits.
Investment fund's commodity is value - the rest are just tools to optimize the value.
WSL was a subsystem to run Linux under Windows 10 without an explicit VM host. It was an Ubuntu Linux version. Later MS released WSL2, complete redesign, still for Windows 10.
With Windows 11 the WSL2 also supported GUI programs.
There's hardly a standard for a 'quality' contribution to discussion. Many styles, many opinions, many ways to react and support one's statements.
If anything, it had been quite customary to supply references for some important facts. Thus letting readers to explore further and interpret the facts.
With AI in the mix the references become even more important, in the view of hallucinations and fact poisoning.
Otherwise, it's a forum. Voting, flagging, ignoring are the usual tools.
"...C is my favorite language and I love the freedom and exploration it allows me. I also love that it is so close to Assembly and I love writing assembly for much of the same reasons!"
I wonder what is author's view about user's reasons to choose a C API?
What I mean is users may want exactly the same freedom and immediacy of C that the author embraces. However, the very approach to encapsulation by hiding the layout of the memory, the use of accessor functions limits the user's freedom and robs them of performance too.
In my view, the choice of using C in projects comes with certain responsibilities and expectations from the user. Thus higher degree of trust to the API user is due.
So called slow-thinking may not be an all around trait, but rather specific mode in some contexts.
Do you generally experience slow physiological and neural reactions? In other words is it a 'hardware' limitation?
My guess, in your case it may be more about specific contexts. Some topics/domains may not be your forte, so to speak, yet you could be familiar with them enough to get engaged.
So a reasonable choice could be not to engage into debates, instead take a role of a talk show host which encourages guests to talk and tell. It's a win-win case, the other side shines, you learn about the person and the topic.
Eventually you'd know which topics are "yours". It's not possible to know everything, yet it's very much possible to listen to anything (unless it's a preschooler asking for ice-cream non-stop).
Also, exercising your memory may be of great help in life in general. Fast recall saves you more time for processing the information.
>...dashboard display showed that it auto-paired with her iPhone... which was named with her first and last name.
So many times a rental car comes with a dozen of profiles from previously paired phones along with their phone books, saved map locations, history. Not much use, of course, still, it leaks out without much thought to it.
Guess what, the hardest thing is to remind myself to clear my profile before returning the car...
Not that far away from the TV commercials of some major hardware store running in this season and advertizing chain-saws, drills, and lawn-mowers nicely wrapped under the Xmas tree...
>...TDD is great for some types of code, where the code is mostly self-contained with few external dependencies and the expected inputs and outputs are well defined and known ahead of time.
I find that TDD is very well fit to fix the expectations from the external dependencies.
Of course, when such dependency is extensive, like an API wrapper, then writing equally extensive tests would be redundant. Even then, the core aspects of the external dependencies should be fixed testably.
Testing is a balance game, even with TDD. The goal is to increase certainty under dynamic changes and increasing complexity.
I find that overthinking is a byproduct of overly complex expectations.
These expectations are often externally imposed either by industry or by our own experiences.
This dissonance is exacerbated by tools which require as much complex skills or lack the expected complexity in their output.
"Hello world" town reminds a hopelessly overpopulated slums detached from glitzy shine of a megapolis that one can experience but not truly become one.
Also floating on your back is a great way to rest and regroup. One thing that could be challenging with it is that if the waves are too choppy or with strong wind, it may be hard to keep the face esp. nose clear of water, which could add to panic. This position also needs some light kicks to keep legs from sinking. Restoring the breathing rhythm is what lets one get some control over the situation.
No matter the skill, we humans are still the land creatures. Let's stay safe!
Not that the comparison is equal, but imagine if one day the stackoverflow et al. went dark for good... (horror!)
How many important projects would suddenly need to extend their deadlines, how many hopeful interviews would go bust. How many coding approaches would have to be re-discovered or written anew based on present best-practices.
Where all that collective need for "tribal-knowledge" would channel to?
If a parent is a practitioner of "strong-hand" approach. Your experts would suggest which side of the hand to use or not on which child's body part?
It's absurd, of course, the experts do develop their values and indeed philosophy based on their experience. Even AI based advisor would be acting according to programmed balances and checks.
Thus the importance of how you tell a wrong advice from a right one.
A wrong advice may be furnished on insufficient detail of the presented issue, or a biased assessment as could be the case with parent only observation. Yet the effect of such advice will be directed at the child.
> ...we have a very rigorous selection process for the coaches and strong QA...
What is your QA approach? How do you tell a right expert advice from an insufficiently right?
Would your experts 'diagnoze' a child based solely on parent's presentation of issue the child/family is experiencing? In simple cases this may be reasonable, but such common issue as tantrums may be deep and multifaceted.
This brings another aspect of the responsiblity of your experts for giving any corrective advice to the parent. What is the ethical balance between giving a wrong advice vs. right advice that didn't work?
I wonder too, whether this is a service to help parents to stay sane or is it to help children overcome development hurdles?
Both of these ends are somewhat irrational, with no one right solution. Especially so when it's a health issue, or living environment problem. Health calls for pediatrician attention.
There're already well established meeting point web sites for parents, like whattoexpect.com and similar. Which pretty much sooth parent's worries and give a variety of community-advices. As often as "it's a stage to grow over". And, in personal experience, we parents grow over it together with the kids.
Personally, I see benefit in a variety of resources vs. one central, no matter how expert, point. But I could understand busy parents' desire to source this from a single "curated" and customized place.
Investment fund's commodity is value - the rest are just tools to optimize the value.