25% business and product roadmapping, 15% discovery, 10% coding, 15% unit testing/debugging/refactoring, 25% scrum/huddle/other useless meetings, 10% answering stupid questions at the 11th hour about why we need this feature that they asked for.

Replace “employees” with “downline” then

pooping photo

just keep pushing through. (No pun intended)

Classy all around. Hope she’s on a Teams call with her camera and microphone on and making all of her employees incredibly uncomfortable.

They hurt like a bitch too. Swam across one while snorkeling in Florida a few months ago. Had a couple tentacles wrapped around my arm. Not fun. And flared up again 2 weeks later. Also not fun.

No it’s a tool, created and used by people. You’re not treating the tool like a person. Tools are obviously not subject to laws, can’t break laws, etc… Their usage is subject to laws. If you use a tool to intentionally, knowingly, or negligently do things that would be illegal for you to do without the tool, then that’s still illegal. Same for accepting money to give others the privilege of doing those illegal things with your tool without any attempt at moderating said things that you know is happening. You can argue that maybe the law should be more strict with AI usage than with a human if you have a good legal justification for it, but there’s really no way to justify being less strict.

It’s pretty simple as I see it. You treat AI like a person. A person needs to go through legal channels to consume material, so piracy for AI training is as illegal as it would be for personal consumption. Consuming legally possessed copywritten material for “inspiration” or “study” is also fine for a person, so it is fine for AI training as well. Commercializing derivative works that infringes on copyright is illegal for a person, so it should be illegal for an AI as well. All produced materials, even those inspired by another piece of media, are permissible if not monetized, otherwise they need to be suitably transformative. That line can be hard to draw even when AI is not involved, but that is the legal standard for people, so it should be for AI as well. If I browse through Deviant Art and learn to draw similarly my favorite artists from their publically viewable works, and make a legally distinct cartoon mouse by hand in a style that is similar to someone else’s and then I sell prints of that work, that is legal. The same should be the case for AI.

But! Scrutiny for AI should be much stricter given the inherent lack of true transformative creativity. And any AI that has used pirated materials should be penalized either by massive fines or by wiping their training and starting over with legally licensed or purchased or otherwise public domain materials only.

Don’t forget about fidget apps, so throw in some bubble wrap too.

TBF, the stereo speakers probably sound better and are certainly capable of being much louder than my phone speakers. But yeah, miles better in every other capacity.

Robot. Always robot. And music is too loud now.

They US just kept the name the discoverer wanted instead of giving into those British asshats that just wanted to troll Sir Davy.

It probably wasnt really a willful defiance thing. It’s likely more correct to say that we kept the name because by the time they changed it officially in Europe, we had millions of students across the country that had textbooks with the name Aluminum in it, that had already been taught the original name, and if the inconsistentcy was even important enought to consider “correcting”, it was likely deemed too costly and too much of a headache to change at the time. By the time people were buying reprints/new editions/more recently written textbooks anyway, professional chemists in the US had been calling it Aluminum for years. Given how isolated we were from Europe in the early 1800s, there was very little pressure to align with them on it, and so it stayed. The longer it stayed the more likely it was to be permanent, and here we are.

But yeah, Sir Humphrey Davy was an indecisive wishy-washy namer of elements, disseminated multiple names across the world, but somehow that is our fault when we just stuck with the one we were given and everyone else changed over nitpicky conventions. It’s not the only thing that Brits shit on about American English that is entirely their invention or their mistake:

• “Soccer” being a British term short for “Association Football”

• The season “Fall” being a British term shortened from the phrase “The Fall of the Leaf” and directly complementary to “Spring” which comes from the phrase “The Spring of the Leaf”, which they still use despite making fun of Americans for “Fall” instead of their “Autumn”, which Americans also use.

• “Dove” instead of “dived”, “pled” instead of “pleaded”, “have gotten” instead of “have got”, etc. all started in Britain but were dropped there and stayed in the US.

• “Herb” being pronounced with an audible “h”. The word is borrowed from French, where the h is silent, exactly like , “honorary”, and “honesty”. Neither country pronounces either of those words with an “h” sound, but that doesnt stop people like Eddie Izzard shitting on how Americans say it with a silent “h” despite the American pronunciation being, arguably, more correct given the word’s origins.

Side note, it is crazy how many words in English are borrowed from French, even if they are horribly mangled and unrecognizable now in a lot of cases. The British Aristocracy really had their noses shoved firmly up French asses for a lot of their history in the last few centuries.

Well, first I gotta ask, is any of this really necessary or worth it? You want to resolve some limitations with the standard MIDI format, but are those limitations worth this much trouble to fix? “Buy dont build” is an important principle for any developer to take to heart because we all want to just do it ourselves, dive into the challenge, fix the little gripes, etc. But sometimes good is good enough and there’s no reason to retread the same ground someone else has. If you absolutely need something standard MIDI format can’t give you or available editors dont meet your needs, then sure, build away. But otherwise, save yourself the trouble, put your focus on the more important aspect of your project and just use the standard format.

And dont fall for the sunk cost fallacy. You have already invested time into this, and that time is gone. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that you should sink in more time if the outcome is not going to justify the additional time cost. It is okay to just shelf it for now. You can always come back to it if you need to later as well.

“You can fucking try…” 🙃

My father in law decided randomly one day I was going to learn to drive manual. So he started up the pickup truck, and said “it’s easy to get started going down hill” as he demonstrated rolling down a steep hill. Then he u-turned, parked the truck at the bottom of that steep hill, turned off the engine got out and said “your turn”. Dick.

I mean, not all of those are less cute.

I mean, we all know about it now. Does that ruin the kink for them? Or do they like that we know?

Thanks for the recommendations

Its the min value of the input params, or Infinity.

And the reason it’s Infinity If there is no input, for better or worse, under the hood the method is assigning a variable, min, the highest value possible and then comparing it to each element in the list, reassigning it when it encounters an element lower than its value at the time. So it will obviously always be reassigned if there are any elements at all (if they’re less than Infinity, I guess). But if there are no elements, it’s never reassigned, and thus returns Infinity. It could have just signed min to the first element instead if Infinity, but that would lead to a runtime error when min was run without a function. If you’re not going to throw a runtime error though, it makes sense for min to return Infinity because, what other number could you return that couldn’t actually be the minimum

Narrator: “It wasn’t B.”

Say when…

I had a manager once tell me during a casual conversation with complete sincerity that one day with advancements in compression algorithms we could get any file down to a single bit. I really didn’t know what to say to that level of absurdity. I just nodded.