I've always taken 'Welcome to the Future' as the thing being presented is futuristic and exists now in the present. Not 'in the future we will welcome you to the future' - while that is a nice sentiment it's utterly useless. To point out the obvious - of course futuristic things exist in the future and of course I have to wait for the future to happen.
But they have, right? Wegovy works really well. Ozempic is off label for weight loss only in the sense that it is the semaglutide drug that is marketed for diabetes and that it therefore isn't sold at the same high dose as Wegovy.
That's not what the article says that the court found though. It says that the Transport Agency needs to find another way of delivering the plates. The case was not against the postal service.
Dogs have more joints, one for the knee where the femur meets the tibia and one for the ankle where the tibia meets the tarsal bones. If you just have one single joint in the hind legs you probably want to be able to push off as easily as possible, so the lower one makes more sense.
You could require candidates to publicly disclose their ranking of the other candidates before the election. If they have to lock in their preference a few days before voting day that in itself would be informative for voters.
I think candidates might be reluctant to do this, since it could be seen as an admission that the candidate thinks they might not win (although personally I would view a candidate as being arrogant and complacent if they couldn't imagine losing).
You're probably right, though, that candidates should be forced to do this, and maybe they should be able to choose whether or not to disclose their preference in advance to potential voters. If they opt to keep it secret and they win, then their preference never has to be revealed, and if they are eliminated then only their highest remaining preference is revealed.
Admittedly I haven't proved that there aren't times when a candidate may need to tactically reorder their preferences based on the actual distribution of votes, but I can't think of a situation where they wouldn't want to re-assign their votes to the candidate whose values are most similar to theirs / their voters.
I like this and would like to see someone work out its implications. Otherwise, asset voting just seems like a way that campaign funders could stuff 13 straw candidates on the ballot with positions tangled enough to dilute the support of 2-3 threatening candidates (threatening to a particular policy, for example), then after the vote the straw candidates all fall and throw their votes to Mussolini, Jr..
That's an interesting theoretical attack that I hadn't considered, thank you for sharing it.
I think a possible rule to defend against it would be to mandate that any political party needs to have received at least 5% of the popular vote in that local region in the previous local elections in order to be eligible to stand candidates for the national congress/parliament.
If a candidate wants to stand without the backing of any political party, they would need to receive at least 20% of the (first round) votes in their district in order to win (without needing to stand in the local elections first).
Forcing candidates to publish their vote assignments at registration time might be the way to go, though, as it would help to expose these straw candidates, and also mean that the candidates wouldn't have to be present when the voting result is announced.
To avoid embarrassment, candidates could place a "null" option in their lists, meaning "If I am eliminated, then discard all the votes I received (including the votes assigned to me from earlier-eliminated candidates) and let the remaining candidates win or lose based on the remaining votes".
At least for the steel industry stuff quoted in OP the electricity consumption is mostly to produce hydrogen gas. The gas will then be stored in giant underground chambers and after that used in the steel production. This works extremely nicely with wind power since the electrolysis decouples the electricity consumption from the steel production. This means that the steel plants will act as stabilizers and modulators of the electricity prices in the whole region to a certain extent (together with the hydro plants and batteries presumably).
Aren't actor critic algorithms very close to GANs already? You have a generator/actor/policy that produces data and a discriminator/critic/q that says if the data is good or bad. The critic trains on the data generated by the actor and some extra info given by the user (rewards or example data) and the actor learns from the signal given by the critic.
I thought 花 and 鼻 were ambiguous in most romanizations - at least I would write it as "hana" in all romanizations I can think of, yet the pitch accent differs. No?
There are systems (basically what looks like a long sideways L) but you're right that romanization doesn't record pitch accent. But there are big regional variations in pitch accent and people won't have trouble understanding you if you use the wrong one, mostly (and you could level the same complaint at hiragana or katakana, after all).
Nevertheless, that's a fair point that I wasn't really thinking about.
I would think the parent is referring to unambiguous in terms of pronunciation. You're right in that you wouldn't know which character was originally used in isolation—or whether kanji was used at all.
As far as I know, there's little (any?) pitch accent that distinguishes between words in Japanese. What pitch accent are you referring to?
Every word in Japanese has a standard pitch accent and some otherwise homophonous ones differ in pitch accent. However, from one dialect to another the pitch accents on the same word can be totally different so I don't think they're usually a big hindrance to communication. Pitch accent differs from English stress accent.
To be clear, you're saying that pitch can change due to regional accent, as opposed to distinguish between homophones, which is which is what 'singhblom was implying, correct?
I thought 花 and 鼻 were ambiguous … yet the pitch accent differs. No?
It does both things. Pitch accent is the only thing distinguishing some homophones (hana, hasi, ame, kumo) but it's also got variation in dialects including a handful where the Tokyo and Osaka versions have the same distinction between two words except with the opposite meaning (sorry, I don't have examples off the top of my head).
Fortunately there aren't that many sentences where it's equally plausible you meant both spider and cloud.
Interesting. Admittedly not a native speaker, I never found pitch accent used to distinguish between homophones during my time in Japan, nor was it introduced in any of the courses I took on Japanese while I was there, including the examples you provide.
I majored in Japanese and it wasn't really seriously introduced until I studied in Japan and I'd already been studying Japanese for three years. But while not learning it won't hinder your ability to communicate too much it can help you sound more natural. NHK publishes a dictionary of pitch accent in standard Tokyo dialect: https://www.amazon.co.jp/NHK-%E6%97%A5%E6%9C%AC%E8%AA%9E%E7%...
Thanks for the reference! Could I trouble you to provide an example from that text that describes such a homophone (as opposed to regional dialect) distinction?
