Stargate Atlantis season 1 episode 4 may not be enjoyable for you.
Stargate Atlantis season 1 episode 4 may not be enjoyable for you.
The inner diameter is less than the outer diameter which makes for a small overdrive gearing ratio, translating to fewer steps even under normal operation.
The hamster balls also win for style points but that’s arguably walking with extra steps.
We don’t even have AGI at datacenter scale. Expecting AGI in a mobile platform that runs off batteries is just wishful thinking at this point.
Prime video should also have to sink or swim on its own.
A smart tv without an internet connection is usually close enough to a dumb TV. It’s not like your TV needs regular security updates so leaving it off your home network is fine.
He was planning to retire 6 months ago, but the market hasn’t been doing great and his brother in law had to borrow some money to deal with gambling debts.
There is also the issue that if building nuclear plants takes too long and is too expensive to be the solution, then such a project would also be too late to matter. Also transmission losses likely mean this is a solution for much less of the world population than you think. If we had a truly global lossless grid, then we would need much less energy storage to begin with.
Impracticalities aside, absurd geoengineering what-ifs are entertaining. Thanks for sharing.
Pumped hydro is both very geologically limited and environmentally detrimental. That technology alone will not substantially reduce the need for other power storage technologies/ peaker plants.
Imagine thinking that PhD’s and postdocs aren’t exploited by capitalism.
I’m not saying normalization is a bad strategy, just that it, like any other processing technique comes with limitations and requires extra attention to avoid incorrect conclusions when interpreting the results.
Because relative to the population density, there were 100 times as many sightings. Or what am I missing.
If you were to attempt to trap and tag bigfoots in both areas, would you end up with 100 times as many angry people in a gorilla suit in the small town? No. You would end up with 1 in both areas. So while the tiny town does technically have 100x the density per capita, each region has only one observable suit wearer.
Assuming the distribution of gorilla suit wearers is uniform, you would expect approximately 99 tiny towns with no big foot sightings for every 1 town with a sighting. So if you were to sample random small towns, because the map says big foots live near small towns, you would actually see fewer hairy beasts than your peer who decided to sample areas with higher population density.
If we could have fractional observations, then all this would be a lot more straightforward, but the discrete nature of the subject matter makes the data imherently noisy. Interpreting data involving discrete events is a whole art and usually involves a lot of filtering.
Simple normalization does amplify signals in low density areas. If a person in a tiny town of 100 reports a bigfoot sighting and another person in an area with 10,000 population also reports a sighting, then with simple normalization the map would show the area with 100 people having 100 times as many big foot sightings per capita as the area with the population of 10k. Someone casually reading the map would erroneously conclude that the tiny town is a bigfoot hotspot and would in general conclude bigfoot clearly prefers rural areas where they can hide in seclusion. When the reality is that the intense signals are artifacts of the sampling/processing methods and both areas have the same number of fursuit wearers.
RealPage can afford to send justices on very nice vacations as a gratuity.
Wood you just leaf him alone.
No, the company is publically listed with around 1 Bil market cap.
My wife worked for a company that was heavily reliant on generating leads from ads. They had lots of real time monitoring of conversion rates to make sure they were actually making more money than they were spending on the ads. They would have to turn ad channels off all the time because the return on ad spend went negative.
So my conclusion is that ads can be somewhat effective for companies, but if they don’t actively monitor and control the performance of their ads, they’re probably just burning money. A lot of companies seem to advertise because they think that’s the only way to grow.
Sssshh don’t go telling Nicholas Cage where our national treasures are kept.
4 years and 20 months ago