There is truth in this, but it isn't as true as some people seem to think. it's true that trial and error is a real part of working in ml, but it isn't just luck whether something works or not. We do know why some models work better than others for many tasks, there are some cases in which some mannual hyperparameter tuning is good, there was a lot of progress in the last 50 years, and so on.

for desktop I prefer mpv

The comic itself is fine as a joke, but I really don't like how parents often don't take responsibility for their actions. Does the mother in this comic really had no reason to create another person, without their consent, knowing they will have to go through the hardships of life? sure, many times kids are overreacting but still, at least have the decency to respond truthfully and not change the subject.

I'm not sure having kids can be said to be "a deeply personal choice", it has to involve at least two other people, one of whom can't even express their opinion on the matter while they will be the one to experience the vast majority of the consequences.

I know this is not what you ment, but to me this does kind of sound like someone saying it's ok for a teacher to sleep with a student of theirs because its a "gift", even though the student can't consent. Life might not be the gift you may precive it to be (at least not for everyone).

technically lands are colorless, plains just produce white mana

otherwise everything seems fine and legal here

not sure if I would, but I will definitely not rule that out. I think almost anything you learn changes how you think and can express your thoughts, although language does it in a more direct way.

in many cases, it's the only language that all participants in the conversation understand, not the only one for each.

but to be honest, if I could exchange my knowledge of my native language with the same amount of experience with something else (e.g. programming, math, etc.) I might take that deal (after moving to a primarily english speaking country of course).

statements of the israeli police about this:

1. the victim was being arrested for drug crimes when this incident happened (not for a violent crime as far as I know).
2. according to the israeli police, the cameras on the 16 officers where off because of a "technical error".
3. the extreme violence applied to the the victim by the 16 armed officers was necessary to restrain him, because he acted violently.
4. the star-of-david-shaped injury was caused from the shoelaces on an officer's shoe, which means that at some point the officer's foot was either pressed hard against the victim's face, or they kicked the victim's face.

source (in hebrew, includes an image of some of the victims wounds and an image of the shoelaces)

I do find it beliveable that the star of david was unintentional (the actual shape, not the kick to the face), which of course doesn't make this case any more justified, but it wouldn't suprise me that much if it was intentional.

that's true relative to the hoop, but relative to the ground the velocity would stay zero. otherwise, relative to the ground, the object would gain velocity without any force being applied to it.

but relative to what? assuming portals work similarly to windows, if I take a hoop/window and place it quickly over an object, that object won't launch in the opposite direction