Aside from the obvious bit size changes (e.g. i8 -> i16 -> i32 -> i64, or f32 -> f64), there is no "hierarchy" of types. Not all ints are representable as floats. u64 can represent up to 2^64 - 1, but f64 can only represent up to 2^53 with integer-level precision. This issue may be subtle, but Rust is all about preventing subtle footguns, so it does not let you automatically "promote" integers to float - you must be explicit (though usually all you need is an `as f64` to convert).
For those who are curious, `...` is a placeholder value in Python called Ellipsis. I don't believe it serves any real purpose other than being a placeholder. But it is an object and it implements `__eq__`, and is considered equal to itself. So `...==...` evaluates to `True`. When you prefix a `True` with `-`, it is interpreted as a prefix negation operator and implicitly converts the `True` to a `1`, so `-(...==...)` is equal to `-1`. Then, you add another prefix `-` to turn the `-1` back into `1`.
`--(...==...)--(...==...)` evaluates to `2` because the first block evaluates to 1, as previously mentioned, and then the next `-` is interpreted as an infix subtraction operator. The second `-(...==...)` evaluates to `-1`, so you get `1 - -1` or `2`.
When chaining multiple together, you can leave off the initial `--`, because booleans will be implicitly converted to integers if inserted into an arithmetic expression, e.g. `True - -1` -> `1 - -1` -> `2`.
> There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
This article is obviously completely tongue-in-cheek, but I feel the need to point out that this sentence is not meant to be a complete inversion of the Perl philosophy of TIMTOWTDI. The word "obvious" is crucial here - there can be more than one way, but ideally only one of the ways is obvious.
I've personally always thought of the Dirac delta function as being the limit of a Gaussian with variance approaching 0. From this perspective, the Heaviside step function is a limit of the error function. I feel the error function and logistic function approaches should be equivalent, though I haven't worked through to math to show it rigorously.
Connecticut. Everything is like this here. I have genuinely considered moving because of this. My current employer has another location in California, and as much as I hate the idea of moving back there, it might be necessary for my own physical well-being.
I've been experiencing this exact issue in the US. Lately a medical issue of mine has been getting worse, and the earliest I can see a new PCP is in May 2025. I managed to get a referral to a specialist by visiting urgent care, but they referred me to a different specialist, and I won't be able to see the latter until late January 2025. Meanwhile my medical issue is continuing to get worse, and I have no one I can talk to about it. I'm looking into alternative options but things are looking bleak. I'm probably going to have to go out-of-network and drive 2 hours to find a doctor that has wait times on the order of weeks (as opposed to the in-network providers, that have wait times on the order of months).
I mean, the sentence "The first actual case of a bug being found" implies that "bug" was already being used in the context of a malfunctioning computer. Otherwise, why would they write it?
This confirms that vx-underground is aware of the claim, and that it likely leaked from them, but they are very explicitly not verifying the claim. It doesn't seem particularly verifiable at the moment.
I saw some folks on Twitter pointing out that "TatetheRailsman" is likely a typo of "TatetheTalisman", which is Tristan Tate's (Andrew Tate's brother) account. Weird that it would be typo'd in their list of protected users. I also don't really buy this from a technical perspective. Why on okta? Why is the list of users and keywords so short? Why is everything a screenshot?
It's not a false dichotomy, the article is very clearly about whether the harm reduction benefits (which clearly exist) outweigh the public health risks (which also clearly exist).
And, of course, there's nuance to that question. It's not like our only options are to keep the status quo or ban vapes entirely. One of the ideas presented in the article is to ban flavored vapes, since that's one of the main points of attraction to non-smokers (especially children), and non-flavored (or tobacco-flavored) vapes will still be viable alternative to smokers.
It's not exactly reasonable to expect super high fidelity audio at the bitrate constraints they're targeting here, and it certainly sounds a lot better than the Opus examples they're comparing against.
I ask this 100% genuinely, since this isn't a subject I've ever given any mind to. Why should we oppose this? What are the potential negative outcomes if this goes through? Can you steelman the argument for why people support this, and explain why you find the arguments unconvincing?
I assume it's just mislabeled, it's a high-angular-momentum hydrogenic orbital, chosen because it looks cool and because it's trivial to evaluate (a spherical harmonic times a simple radial term).