Until now I could get by with Scihub and Arxiv for college and personal hyperfixation research, but I’d actually love to ask an author directly some time if I ever run into a paper where that’s necessary.
Until now I could get by with Scihub and Arxiv for college and personal hyperfixation research, but I’d actually love to ask an author directly some time if I ever run into a paper where that’s necessary.
My college doesn’t include any of the popular publishers in it’s online library, so yeah. It’s either open access or Sci-Hub
The thing it can do best is bewilder developers with it’s strange choices
It’s a decent language I guess. My main criticism is that the constructor paradigm just isn’t well suited for RAII. I always find myself retrofitting Rust’s style of object creation into my C++ code.
deleted by creator
I can hear this gif
One person can only be on the spot for one number. As soon as more than one gets killed, that would mean that the trolley has traversed some distance, which implies that it has killed an infinite number of people. That is impossible in any finite timespan under the aforementioned assumption. Thus the only logical conclusion is that it gets stuck after the first person is killed, at the exact spot the first number is mapped to.
I guess there could also be a different solution when you look at the problem from a different angle. Treating infinity with this little mathematical care tends to cause paradoxes.
Assuming that it takes some amount of energy to kill one person, and that the trolley doesn’t have an engine with infinite power, choosing the bottom track would save lives. The trolley would have to expend an infinite amount of energy to move any distance from the starting point, so it would just get stuck there while trying to crush the unimaginable amount of people bunched up in front of it.
If it’s somehow possible to code up my design In OpenSCAD, it’s infinitely more preferable over FreeCAD
I keep bashing my head against the horrible UI way more as a beginner. Just as I manage to bring the million toolbars into a reasonable arrangement, I switch workspaces and then they’re all messed up again. I couldn’t care less about the topological naming problem right now
Forcing companies to release source code once they go bankrupt or abandon a project can only have good results. Yes, it eats into profits of successors, but something being profitable does not mean it’s good. If people would rather use decades old code rather than something new, what does that say about the quality of the new code? This would force companies to continuously improve, rather than profit from stagnation. And it would prune away the parts of the economy that contribute nothing.
We have wasted way more money on way stupider projects. Would love to see this built rather than the military getting even more money.
Real socialists are constantly defending themselves from accusations of utopianism, meanwhile the people in grad actively pretend to live in a world of unicorns and pixie dust…
Lemmy really seems to be full of landmines. A lit of people here have no filter at all. I guess that’s one of the downsides of having many instances with vastly different rules interacting.
And buying the movie probably won’t give you a file, but instead just the right to stream it from their servers. At some point they’ll pull the plug on that and you’ll loose access.
They don’t exactly build the cocoon. Caterpillars periodically shed their outer skin layer, and the “cocoon” is just one of those layers. Turning into soup is also quite inaccurate. This video explains the process pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RaCURU6A2o
Reading that really makes me want to give it a go. If swift’s package management is anything like Rust or Go, I could see myself enjoying it