It’s trivially easy on everything—except maybe Windows. I use them because I like the way they look.
Android: long press the dash
Linux: Compose Key + three dashes (you can set the Compose Key to whatever you want, I use the Right Alt key).
macOS: Opt + Shift + dash
Fella, the stuff Gen Z struggles with is the light switch.
Not holding my breath until all appeals get denied
The problem with having reasonable and respectful discourse with people you disagree with, is that you first have to find people willing to have reasonable and respectful discourse. In real life I’ve met plenty. On Twitter, there are none. They’re mostly just in getting a rise out of libs and lefties. We’ve already been finding that disengaging with them and moving to a platform they don’t have influence over has made them a lot more impotent.
They said that in 2016 too after rigging things against populist grassroots candidates in favour of establishment Democrats and learned nothing.
I think going from the relatively peaceful period of the 90s in the west to living through the Bush administration, 9/11, racist fear mongering and alarmism over terrorism, mass erosion of rights and privacy, jingoism and wars in the Middle East under false pretenses, the Bush adminstration’s connections with the military-industrial complex getting exposed, seeing stuff like Fox News, Glenn Beck, and Bill O’Reilly start to mindrot the boomer generation into unrecognizable husks of their former selves, the 2008 market crash due the effects of all the failed conservative economic policies and deregulation that occured the past few decades — coloured Gen Xers’ and Millennials’ perspectives in a way that I imagine would be difficult for Gen Z to grasp.
They have no point of reference to see how badly things changed under the Republican party because they already grew up in the shit, and due to Republican obstructionism they may think that it’s Democrats faults because Obama and Biden were in the White House, but much of the fixing actually needs to happen in the house. But even that may not be enough because of the partisan Supreme Court.
And honestly, in a case of a lot of cis Gen Z boys who’ve been sucked into some shoddy conservative ideas, I feel like we failed them if guys like Andrew Tate, Trump, and other such garbage heaps of human beings were the ones getting through to them.
I think feeling frustrated that we’re not doing enough to prevent the next set of people from having to go through this and suffer this bad is a perfectly reasonable reaction to have, actually.
Outside of a few small local businesses that actually care about doing right by people, loyalty hasn’t mattered for decades dude. Companies don’t give a shit about any of us. Why even bother thinking in terms of loyalty, it’s completely misaligned with how they operate.
The more people get into it the less valuable it becomes is the thing. But others pointed out there’s a ton of other reasons it’s problematic, like the need for those other jobs to exist to actually, like, have a functioning society.
Edit: Also arguably a lot of the low hanging fruit coding positions aren’t as lucrative as they once were. People with experience are doing well. New people are having a tougher time getting their foot in the door compared to 5-10 years ago.
That’s one of the reasons wrestling fans prefer the term scripted or staged as opposed to fake. It still requires tons of athleticism, and lots of wrestlers are still taking very real hits and injuries despite trying to minimize the impacts of them.
It’s simultaneously possible to realize that something is useful while also recognizing the damage that its trend is causing from a sustainability standpoint, and that neither realization particularly demonstrates a lack of understanding about AI.
My fear is that Google is going to succeed in using this as an excuse to unilaterally destroy the free web like they’ve already been trying with attestation.
But the modern web really does suck. I’m not sure how to fix it without corporate influence.
The conventional view on infinity would say they’re actually the same size of infinity assuming the 1 and the 100 belong to the same set.
You’re right that one function grows faster but infinity itself is no different regardless of what you multiply them by. The infinities both have same set size and would encompass the same concept of infinity regardless of what they’re multiplied by. The set size of infinity is denoted by the order of aleph (ℵ) it belongs to. If both 1 and 100 are natural numbers then they belong to the set of countable infinity, which is called aleph-zero (ℵ₀). If both 1 and 100 are reals, then the size of their infinities are uncountably infinite, which means they belong to aleph-one (ℵ₁).
That said, you can definitely have different definitions of infinity that are unconventional as long as they fit whatever axioms you come up with. But since most math is grounded in set theory, that’s where this particular convention stems from.
Anyways, given your example it would really depend on whether time was a factor. If the question was “would you rather have 1 • x or 100 • x dollars where x approaches infinity every second?” well the answer is obvious, because we’re describing something that has a growth rate. If the question was “You have infinity dollars. Do you prefer 1 • ∞ or 100 • ∞?” it really wouldn’t matter because you have infinity dollars. They’re the same infinity. In other words you could withdraw as much money as you wanted and always have infinity. They are equally as limitless.
Now I can foresee a counter-argument where maybe you meant 1 • ∞ vs 100 • ∞ to mean that you can only withdraw in ones or hundred dollar bills, but that’s a synthetic constraint you’ve put on it from a banking perspective. You’ve created a new notation and have defined it separately from the conventional meaning of infinity in mathematics. And in reality that is maybe more of a physics question about the amount of dollar bills that can physically exist that is practical, and a philosophical question about the convenience of 1 vs 100 dollar bills, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the size of infinity mathematically. Without an artificial constraint you could just as easily take out your infinite money in denominations of 20, 50, 1000, a million, and still have the same infinite amount of dollars left over.
The weird thing is, I’m not sure any customers actually do care. it genuinely just feels like engineers finding ways to masturbate over how thin they can get something.
Wait I thought Christmas was a month away but we’re already getting presents?
A lot of my leftist friends will still let the bad be the enemy of any sort of good whatsoever it seems. It’s exhausting as a leftist when you can never be outraged enough for other leftists.
“Return to work”. Motherfuckers, they were already employed. 🙄 I bet CNBC is one of the companies that had a controversial RTO policy. I utterly resent these attempts at trying to normalize deceptive language for return to office schemes subconsciously, like people that don’t want to return to office aren’t working somehow and it’s somehow their fault it’s a problem, and not the fault of an inflexible employer.
Hell yeah 🤘🏻