Thing is, you can't trust anything coming out of Israel currently, even more so than usual (which is saying something). It's election season and politicians won't let little things like reality get in the way of campaigning.
That's not to say that what politicians like Ben-Gvir say isn't important insofar as it can help you understand how they think, but it's not necessarily connected to anything actually going on.
Indeed. [And caveat this whole comment with "as far as I understand" because this is maths and you can't be too careful…] The difference being that set theory is way more fundamental and abstract than most mathematicians ever need, so on the one hand it can be completely stated with only 8 or 9 axioms (and a system of first-order logic) but on the other hand it can take some ingenuity to encode a mathematical object as a set in a way that makes it easy to do stuff correctly and hard to mess up.
Most type theories take a more intuitive approach, so they do resemble something, namely, functional programming. Just a very rigorous approach to it. If you manage to construct a term of the correct type, you can be sure that it's what you think it is, whereas with set theory you have to constantly check yourself (if you require the rigor). The trade-off being that type theory requires you to work with complete rigor and reasoning at a low level can be more difficult than set-theoretic reasoning at a low level.
The TL;DR is that in type theory your constructions often look like what you actually want to do (and as a consequence you sometimes have to work directly with the underlying system, like a programming language), but in set theory there's a disconnect between the conceptual level and the underlying nitty-gritty logic.
And of course it's your responsibility as opposed to the people designing infrastructure, the politicians approving their plans, and the corporations lobbying the latter
If you mean Apple, it wouldn't really make sense for them to do that. Apple primarily generates income from hardware sales, so they wouldn't care if people run other software on the hardware they already bought.
Edited to say: this doesn't really apply for the iPhone/iPad as the application ecosystem is locked down. macOS isn't though so users will do whatever they want anyway. There are even tiling window managers for macOS!
It's always amusing when the Neovim users pretend to like Lua. It's not like Emacs Lisp is the best language out there (it's not, and I'd much rather Emacs was configured in Scheme, they're working on it...), but at least it's a good fit, by design, for configuration.
I've never understood the need for fish. The shell experience is basically the same as zsh, and although it's much more pleasant to script for, you miss out on compatibility with POSIX-compliant snippets, and besides, if you're writing long and complicated scripts that need anything more than a handful of scalar variables you should probably be using Python (or Perl if you're an old-school masochist).
IIRC pressing the power button once silences the call (but doesn’t reject it) and pressing it again rejects the call.
Also if the phone is already unlocked, there’s a button to decline. I don’t know why it doesn’t appear when the phone is locked.
Not exactly the tweet, but dropping this again here because of the title.
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. ... A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. ... But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socio-economic unfairness.
The finding held when the researchers accounted for people being right-handed, right-footed and right-eye dominant, and was seen in both male and female walkers.
That would be Kristallnacht, the original 9/11
Thing is, you can't trust anything coming out of Israel currently, even more so than usual (which is saying something). It's election season and politicians won't let little things like reality get in the way of campaigning.
That's not to say that what politicians like Ben-Gvir say isn't important insofar as it can help you understand how they think, but it's not necessarily connected to anything actually going on.
Even Israel voted differently to the US, that's way funnier than it should be
I see way more comics about comics about Nazis than comics about Nazis.
Indeed. [And caveat this whole comment with "as far as I understand" because this is maths and you can't be too careful…] The difference being that set theory is way more fundamental and abstract than most mathematicians ever need, so on the one hand it can be completely stated with only 8 or 9 axioms (and a system of first-order logic) but on the other hand it can take some ingenuity to encode a mathematical object as a set in a way that makes it easy to do stuff correctly and hard to mess up.
Most type theories take a more intuitive approach, so they do resemble something, namely, functional programming. Just a very rigorous approach to it. If you manage to construct a term of the correct type, you can be sure that it's what you think it is, whereas with set theory you have to constantly check yourself (if you require the rigor). The trade-off being that type theory requires you to work with complete rigor and reasoning at a low level can be more difficult than set-theoretic reasoning at a low level.
The TL;DR is that in type theory your constructions often look like what you actually want to do (and as a consequence you sometimes have to work directly with the underlying system, like a programming language), but in set theory there's a disconnect between the conceptual level and the underlying nitty-gritty logic.
So true. Definitely the most annoying thing about that accent (even more than the HAPPY vowel).
And of course it's your responsibility as opposed to the people designing infrastructure, the politicians approving their plans, and the corporations lobbying the latter
/s
If you mean Apple, it wouldn't really make sense for them to do that. Apple primarily generates income from hardware sales, so they wouldn't care if people run other software on the hardware they already bought.
Edited to say: this doesn't really apply for the iPhone/iPad as the application ecosystem is locked down. macOS isn't though so users will do whatever they want anyway. There are even tiling window managers for macOS!
A surprisingly common attitude, historically speaking
It's always amusing when the Neovim users pretend to like Lua. It's not like Emacs Lisp is the best language out there (it's not, and I'd much rather Emacs was configured in Scheme, they're working on it...), but at least it's a good fit, by design, for configuration.
The university is still named that way
Maybe unconfigured. Even Jesus Christ wouldn’t be able to handle the Vimscript.
I've never understood the need for
fish. The shell experience is basically the same aszsh, and although it's much more pleasant to script for, you miss out on compatibility with POSIX-compliant snippets, and besides, if you're writing long and complicated scripts that need anything more than a handful of scalar variables you should probably be using Python (or Perl if you're an old-school masochist).As if modern websites care about Firefox
IIRC pressing the power button once silences the call (but doesn’t reject it) and pressing it again rejects the call.
Also if the phone is already unlocked, there’s a button to decline. I don’t know why it doesn’t appear when the phone is locked.
Not exactly the tweet, but dropping this again here because of the title.
I think they’ve just been trained on corporate speak
According to the theology of some Christian denominations (I can't remember which, exactly), the answer is yes.
"Socialism is when the government does stuff. And if it does a whole lot of stuff, that's communism!"