Yes, that is correct. And they slept until they weren't tired anymore, which was usually 9ish hours, a totally normal amount of sleep for someone that age.
We live in the Bay Area, so the sun was setting around 8pm since it was spring/summer. Our whole family are night owls, but regular society just isn't designed for that.
Of course now that they have regular school they have a regular bedtime that still gets them 9+ hours sleep (actually closer to 10 hours), but they are still groggy and slow in the morning because it is not when their body wants to be awake.
One approach you could take is to license the code (or simply the tricks) to big tech companies. They can use the tricks, but must pay you x amount. You can provide technical support for implementation and benchmarking.
That's how I would make profit from what you're doing as many big tech companies have already achieved (and more) of what you claim.
I know this as I work in such a company. However, I'd bet they'd pay a fair amount for new solutions that differ from their own.
Hmm the main issue sounds like the market capture is limited - I highly disagree bigtech companies have achieved what we already have - maybe OpenAI or other AI companies might have done it - but it's all "might" have.
I worked myself in the past at NVIDIA making algos faster, so it's not a done deal big tech companies have all the tips and tricks. They have the best hardware, but software not so much.
The issue with licensing code is your revenue capture is minimal - maybe a training platform which provides everyone and not just big tech companies a cheap and efficient implementation sounds much better.
The issue with licensing is how much do you charge? How do you monitor usage? Etc
I sometimes wish my childhood environment were conducive to holding onto a second language. I took Spanish in high school but because there was nobody around to speak it with I lost it entirely.
I’m now working on acquiring a second language I might actually get some usage out of, but nothing can parallel learning secondary languages early on.
From an evolutionary perspective it makes no sense either. Multilingualism would happen sometimes, but it was only when your tribe was conquered by a neighbor. Other multi lingual scenarios are very recent. If there are any evolutionarily rooted features around this, it would be related to the former. Though, there could still be some coincidental benefit, it just seems as unlikely as any other totally coincidental benefit.
Lists in Python have a integer for their size and a pointer for each element. Sets presumably have some number of buckets that are used to put pointers in, but many more buckets are allocated than get used in small sets.
Perhaps someone can explain to me why this concept needs to exist. When I visit regular Wikipedia on mobile, I get mobile style sheets. What’s the need for the separate url? Maybe Wikipedia is ok with this but I’ve found Confluence basically completely breaks if you try to give someone on desktop a mobile link. Seems like the whole system is just not quite right.
It's a holdover from before reactive styling was really a thing - there was a stage, if you recall, where people were maintaining two versions of their websites, one being for mobile. It was awful, and mobile user agents were bombarded with banners asking to switch to the mobile version, which would invariably break the flow and bounce them back to a landing page. They then had to claw their way back to where they were in the website, if they could. On the upside, it was mobile first, and had more intuitive layouts for mobile devices. I suspect that Wikipedia still maintains this split so as to not break those old web clients, or any other client built on top of the mobile web interface. I bet that if I broke out my old Nokia E63, I'd still be able to boot up that Symbian browser and read a Wikipedia article.
Because it installs like 100,000 python scripts of mystery origin that run with full privileges. Even if the maintainers are unlikely to be malicious on purpose, it only takes one person accidentally putting a typo in a dependencies file in one of the hundreds of packages it imports... many of which not commonly used ones.
It's better than nothing but is it enough to run potentially malicious code?
I haven't checked recently but a while ago most distros defaulted to letting anyone peep into other users' home dirs. Moreover there has been so many exploits over the years letting a user gain root privileges that, for the purpose of security, unix users are akin to a bathroom lock.
