PAGINA INTERDETTA DAL CENTRO NAZIONALE PER IL CONTRASTO DELLA PEDOPORNOGRAFIA ONLINE (C.N.C.P.O.)
Il tuo browser sta tentando di raggiungere un sito Internet contenente immagini e filmati di pedopornografia minorile. L'inibizione dell'accesso a questo sito é prevista dalla legge n. 38/2006.
Questo servizio di protezione della navigazione sulla rete Internet è predisposto grazie alla collaborazione tra il Centro Nazionale per il Contrasto della Pedopornografia Online e gli Internet Service Providers italiani.
La visualizzazione intenzionale, la diffusione, la detenzione, la cessione, la produzione e la commercializzazione di questo tipo di materiale sono puniti dalla legge come reato.
The day your wish is fullfilled is the day I stop working with Python. I can't stand all those useless braces everywhere, why are they there at all since good practice mandates proper indentation anyway?
I am at the point where I prefer single quotes for strings, instead of double quotes, just because they feel cleaner. And unfortunately pep8 sometimes mandates double quotes for reasons unknown.
A while ago, when thinking about syntax design for a new language, I considered this combination (`:` and `end`, as opposed to `do` and `end` as used by Lua etc).
Are there any languages that use it, or is Python unique in using `:` to begin a block?
> Not just the Netherlands, most of Europe counts floors like this: ground, first, second, etc.
I think it wildly differs all around Europe.
In Spain for example, if someone says "1st floor" it can be two or three floors above the actual ground floor, if there is a "Entresuelo" or "Principal", and you start counting after those. Actual ground floor is "bajo".
On the other hand you have the "atico" (attic) which is the top level floor, unless there is a "sobre atico" ("above the attic"), so just because you live in the attic doesn't mean you live on the top floor.
Then every region can have their own convention, or even difference in neighborhoods in the same city.
I'm not sure how many countries in Europe count like that, the online information is totally unreliable. For example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/mvnkja/floor_numbe...
That map is absolutely incorrect for a bunch of countries, e.g. the Nordic ones.
I suspect that "most people" even includes the guy who sprinted at 27.8 mph. The crank lengths and gearing are all wrong on a bike for an explosive sprint, preventing all the right muscles from being recruited to the job. No matter the speed and gear, your feet are constrained into spinning around the same smallish circle. And wile you can use your whole body in order to sprinting on a bike, it's not the same like when a running sprinter uses their entire body.
Mmmhh, not sure about that. Most people, even if not reaching high speeds, can still go substantially faster on a bike than running. Even grandmas, it's all relative.
People like Bolt should be compared with bike sprinters, who top out at around 45mph.
“His thighs were measured with a circumference of 73 centimetres (29 in). A circumference of 86 centimetres (34 in) has also been recorded, and the size of his quad muscles has led to him being called "Quadzilla" by some in his sport.”
That's definitely not true. You can sprint explosively on a bike, you just have to get up and push your legs down on the ground. Since your leg is at 90 degrees you can exert maximum power. I've done 50kph on the flats on a bike, it's not that hard; far easier than on foot!
If you own enough of these automated factories, you don't need to sell anything at all. Just produce whatever luxury item you want, in addition to mundane things like food and shelter (in the form of caviar and villas, because why not?).
That will mark the time when technology is advanced enough that humanity will fracture with small independent groups going out and fending for themselves, possibly in outer space. Some SF scenarios call them "great houses", because they somewhat resemble feudal kingdoms where a kind of extended family rules, except there are no peasants.
Seems like a very small-minded way to see things... But if it makes you feel any better, Musk is only one of many people working at SpaceX. You could see him as just a figurehead and you wouldn't too far from reality.
I could call you small minded for thinking only of advances in rocket technology, and ignoring the negative aspects of advancing Musk's power and influence. Should I?
No current LLM understands words, nor letters. They all have input and output tokens, that roughly correspond to syllabes and letter groupings. Any kind of task involving counting letters or words is outside their realistic capabilities.
LLMs are a tool, and like any other tool, they have strengths and weaknesses. Know your tools.
I understand that, but the article we are discussing points out that LLMs are so good on many tasks, and so good at passing tests, that many people will be tricked into blindly "taking their word for granted" -- even people who should know better: our brain is a lazy machine, and if something works almost always it starts to assume it works always.
I mean, you can ask an LLM to count letters in thousand of words, and pretty much always it will come with the correct answer! So far I don't know of any word other than "банан" that breaks this function.
reply