This beaurcratic development feels like turning a super-tanker that's connected to a hundred other super-tankers. While I accept the priority of back-compatibility, I personally lack the working memory to manage it, while creative problem-solving.
Bloom's 2 sigma problem solved at last! But that's overestimating LLMs, our zeitgeist.
AI can't detect AI, not because AI undetectable, but because it lacks judgment. Its shtick is random generation; the proverbial monkey on a typewriter.
IANAG but the idea is that women get two copies of the X chromosome (XX), and men only one (XY). This explains why women have squared the colour blindness rates of men - women have to get two bad copies, men only one.
Many intelligence related genes are on the X chromosome, so it makes sense you get more variation in men. However, not all genes interact in this way.
Law exams are open book; Engineering exams are not.
I'm not sure exactly what the distinction is - apart from law being "soft" and requiring argument - but it's deeper than inability to reuse past papers.
He's making a more general statement, with "root of all evil", that improving some aspect of something without understanding its effects on the whole outcome, is literally the root cause of evil in the world, in general. Winning the battle but losing the war. Not seeing the forest for the trees. Getting lost in the weeds. Unenlightened self-interest. Not hyperbole, but a particular instance of a general concept.
But on code optimization, k deeply nested loops are not a bad guide to O(n^k), and a candidate for optimization.
That said, I once cached something that obviously needed to be cached - so obvious in fact that a deeper level in the system already cached it.
I think it'll be more like ordered keys in JSON - not ordered, according to the spec, but very useful in practice, because easier to compare, locate keys by eye etc. This order might not merely be "the same" as the input happened to be, but an order customarily used - and there might be a semantic reason for that order in the first place, used in some original, non-JSON, representation.
A problem with semantic markup is when it doesn't do what you want, and you need to wig-wam it. Does this mean you actually wanted presentation markup? Or, since you are trying to convey meaning, does it mean that the semantics aren't rich enough to describe what you mean?
In this D2 example (https://d2-lang.com/assets/images/intro-example-a917149ff3b7...), the diagram is nicely designed to be centered on the nexus node crawler. But the choices of which side the tributary nodes are on is not. You might want cron below and ps->express below - or to the sides.
The grammar can be extended to accommodate this (maybe already has been), but what is the semantic meaning of above, below, left or right?
One semantic choice is made: the "persists" arc is unidirectional, and is presented left-to-right - a natural order for many languages.
(Technically, "declarative" needn't be "semantic", but arguably is the most useful one)
It does seem wrong that nature would use irrational numbers - the fault is more likely in our concepts. Our mathematics may be more parochial than we realize - than we can realize. Alien mathematics may have taken a different route.
jq uses bison (gnu's yacc), which is a nightmare for error diagnosis. Additionally, the founder (though brilliant - or maybe because brilliant) wouldn't accept improvements in error reporting.
