You nailed him.
Shelter cat, never got over it, and I took the photo while he hid and I was opening a can of his food.
Always concerned, disappointed I stopped for a photo, and hungry.
You nailed him.
Shelter cat, never got over it, and I took the photo while he hid and I was opening a can of his food.
Always concerned, disappointed I stopped for a photo, and hungry.
Countries willing to pass on a US patent to China stop getting the chips (or, in this case, chip-making jobs, realistically, but that still hurts)
Also Taiwan doesn’t wanna help China and even if a US sanction was just an excuse to hurt China and get away with it they’d probably do it.
Edit: in this case, this chip is “foreign-produced items […] that are the direct product of U.S. technology or software”, according to the article. I feel it was implied but clarity is always good. US technology, used with permission in a Taiwanese good, and that permission could be retracted.
Depending on the specific game itself, we can boil down the multiple-stat problem in a few ways. If the goal is to get all the stats as high as possible evenly, then we can assign each stat a multiplier based on how low it is. Fixing lower stats becomes worth more than buffing higher stats. That multiplier would depend on the game, on how much it punishes the low stat. The multiplier itself might end up being a whole new problem to solve, but for now I’ll just say its not my problem and call it X.
Whatever X is though, every stat can then be reduced to a single value using it. Super-low fortitude should be buffed over already-high mana according to X, so all of the numerical values in the game become directly comparable at any stage in this problem. Then I expect it will be equivalent to the knapsack problem. Each item in the game will boost several stats in certain ways, and all of those boosts can be combined using X to become our item value in the knapsack problem.
So I consider it to be the knapsack problem + figuring out X (which might be NP-complete on its own, depending on the game).
According to alphapuggle it burned 4x as long as expected.
I did the same thing. It was allowed in general, with the correct thought, “if you can code it yourself, you know the content”
I had another “program” that would fail to run but that’s because I wrote notes into it. Doubt that was allowed.
Possible we’re looking at the top and the band is a disk around it. Dunno for sure.
Can’t I’m pretty certain Wonka still has the patent.
The issue here is because they’re linked by the owner. If one stock goes up/down, the other does too. This has happened repeatedly with these two companies specifically, even.
So although they don’t own stock in the company in question, they still have a stock in seeing it succeed. Its success will bring about their own financial gain.
The fact that this issue was voiced and they specifically took the action that raises questions about authenticity also means we must question if that’s even the goal. If this went to a different judge, after all, one with no bias, then if this judge is unbiased, he should expect the same outcome. Of course, if he were biased and intended to give a biased ruling to take advantage of the chance to directly increase his wealth, then we’d expect him to be reluctant to let another judge rule on it. He could miss his financial opportunity, after all.
Well they still have a finite life and are less replaceable than a battery. Even if it quadrupled the lifespan (which is a reasonably generous estimate given OP’s 4-year duration and wikipedia telling me supercapacitors last 10-15 years), it would still eventually need to be replaced and that would generally require resoldering it.
I think a much better solution is 2 battery slots, one to be a backup battery, unused, and then when needed, an LED on the mobo can be turned on. Honestly OP could jury-rig up a similar system if he wanted to, although it’d be a bit ugly and anytime something is jury-rigged I don’t really think of it as reliable.
The only real solution is to make this an extended maintenance task. The batteries are cheap so an alert every 4 years is likely sufficient to replace the battery before it dies. You could do it every 2 or 3 years instead at your discretion.
The thing they’re trying to market is a lot of people genuinely don’t know what to say at certain times. Instead of replacing an emotional activity, its meant to be used when you literally can’t do it but need to.
Obviously that’s not the way it should go, but it is an actual problem they’re trying to talk to. I had a friend feel real down in high school because his parents didn’t attend an award ceremony, and I couldn’t help cause I just didn’t know what to say. AI could’ve hypothetically given me a rough draft or inspiration. Obviously I wouldn’t have just texted what the AI said, but it could’ve gotten me past the part I was stuck on.
In my experience, AI is shit at that anyway. 9 times out of 10 when I ask it anything even remotely deep it restates the problem like “I’m sorry to hear your parents couldn’t make it”. AI can’t really solve the problem google wants it to, and I’m honestly glad it can’t.
1/10000, but I don’t think modern banks accept this conversion anymore, so its up to the free market.