This was a cool chapter from so many points of view indeed!
spoiler
Also the Darkshine moment.
And the Serious Series of course!
Looks like an item from a PC or NPC of the Charlatan class...
It mentions "greyskull", maybe some connection with She-Ra or He-Man as well?
Thank you so much! If I understand correctly it's around 80 donors, counting recurring and one-time together?
Cheers! Then it'd be quite cheap if every user gave their 10c/month. Let's see what they say about actual donor-users.
Thank you for the great job! 🙏 🚀
Let me ask two explicit questions:
-
Considering costs and total number of users, how much should be a user's monthly donation to keep things even or a little on the safe side?
-
Considering costs and total number of donators, how much should be a donator's monthly donation to keep things even or a little on the safe side? This is a more realistic estimate, as there are users (say, students) who can't pay (and of course users who simply don't want to pay).
Many Fediverse initiatives seem too shy to give this kind of information, but I think there's nothing wrong about it. Please tell us in time if the economy were to be going bad, nobody wants another lemm.ee event :) As Impossible Mission for the Commodore 64 used to say:
Stay awhile, stay forever!
And since EU is effectively not based on democracy, European citizens won't be able to stop this.
I’m sick of windows, but maybe I should just not risk messing with operating systems I don’t understand? (Also I really hope those screenshots don’t doxx me or something)
It's a little learning curve, but don't give up - I'm happy to see that you aren't! Your understanding is already increasing step by step, and you'll feel a lot of satisfaction because of this too 💪🚀
Functions for Bayesian nonparametric population (or exchangeable, or density) inference. From a machine-learning perspective, it offers a model-free, uncertainty-quantified prediction algorithm.
Interested in trying out Bayesian nonparametrics for your statistical research?
I'd be very grateful if people tried out this R package for Bayesian nonparametric population inference, called inferno :
<https://pglpm.github.io/inferno/>
It is especially addressed to clinical and medical researchers, and allows for thorough statistical studies of subpopulations or subgroups.
Installation instructions are here.
A step-by-step tutorial, guiding you through an example analysis of a simple dataset, is here.
The package has already been tested and used in concrete research about Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, drug discovery, and applications to machine learning.
Feedback is very welcome. If you find the package useful, feel free to advertise it a little :)
as evidenced by the rise of the Julius Caesar of our time—Donald Trump
Is it the author of the article who writes such idiocies? or the author of the book?
Thank you for respecting the votes from the move poll in the previous instance (note: I voted for sopuli). In some other moving communities the moderators just take the votes as suggestions, but then decide themselves.
Cognitive scientist, Barbara W. Sarnecka, discusses the benefits of using Bayesian statistics in developmental research.
In order of "usability", how would you rank the distros you tried there, from best to worse?
One reported feedback there is brilliant:
At first glance, the proposed regulation might appear to be just another flawed attempt to balance security and privacy. But a closer look, especially at the High-Level Group (HLG) advice the EU cites as a foundational source, reveals something far more dangerous. Start with this: when German MEP Patrick Breyer requested the names of the individuals behind the so-called High-Level Group that drafted this sweeping proposal, the EU responded with a list where every single name was blacked out. A law that would introduce unprecedented surveillance powers across Europe is being built on recommendations from an anonymous and unaccountable group. In any democracy, this would be a scandal. In the European Union, it is an outright betrayal of public trust. According to digital rights organization EDRİ, "The HLG has kept its work sessions closed, by strictly controlling which stakeholders got invited and effectively shutting down civil society participation." In short, the process was deliberately closed off to public scrutiny, democratic debate, and expert dissent. Civil society was excluded while powerful lobbyists shaped one of the most consequential digital laws of our time behind closed doors. A blunt overreach of state power: Universal identification and data retention, every click, message, and connection must be logged under your legal name, turning the entire population into perpetual Suspects. Encryption smashed: providers must supply data "in an intelligible way" (Rec 27.ii), forcing them to weaken or bypass end-to-end encryption whenever asked. Backdoors by design: hardware and software makers are ordered to bake permanent law-enforcement access points into phones, laptops, cars, and loT devices (Rec 22, 25, 26). Privacy shields outlawed: VPNS and other anonymity tools must start logging users or shut down. Criminalized resistance: services or developers who refuse to spy on their users face fines, market bans, or prison (Rec 34). No one exempt: the rules cover every "electronic communication service", from open-source chat servers to encrypted messengers to vehicle comms systems (Rec 17, 18, 27.ii). A mass surveillance law, drafted in secrecy by unknown actors, with provisions that go beyond what we see in many authoritarian regimes. And yet, the European Commission is advancing it as if it's routine policy work. The European Commission must halt this process immediately. No law that enables this scale of surveillance, especially one built in the shadows, should ever be allowed to pass. Europe must not become a place where privacy dies quietly behind closed doors. This threatens the fundamental rights of every citizen in the Union.
Thank you for the heads-up, it is quite cheap indeed. I noticed that some of the newsgroups unfortunately have much spam, so I'll see if I'm really interested in subscribing. But some are moderated, luckily.
Fantastic explanation, thank you! Now I understand the difference between "server" and "group". I finally managed to subscribe now.
For anyone in my same position:
- Create an account on news.eternal-september.org
- Add that newsgroup on Thunderbird (Accounts panel, add new account, and so on)
- It's important to tick "Always request authentication" on the Server Settings for that newsgroup account
- Then you can right-click on that account in the folder list and choose "Subscribe". You'll be asked for your eternal-september username and password.
- The subscription window has a search function to search for the newsgroup you want to subscribe to.
Done!
Thanks @tal again very much!
[Solved thanks to @tal. See instructions below.]
I'd like to subscribe and occasionally post to some usenet newsgroup like sci.physics or sci.physics.research. It's difficult! I tried to simply enter "sci.physics" in Thunderbird's Newsgroup reader, but apparently it doesn't work simply like that... Even subscribing to news.eternal-september.org didn't help – I think my understanding of providers and groups is very confused.
Could anyone kindly help?
https://theonion.com/what-to-know-about-mission-impossible-the-final-reckoning/
[If inappropriate I apologize and please delete]
Thanks for sharing these sad news. Understandable that they need a break.
Incidentally, anyone wants to recommend to Murata & ONE to open a Fediverse account?
Brilliant, well-written, and inspiring. Waiting for the upcoming parts!
This is quite new. Just wanted to share. (The link is from Sci-Hub, so the whole thing seems legit).
Edit: but, if I'm getting it right, they're just replacing paywalls with another paywall?
For several years I've been using DuckDuckGo instead of Google Search, and I've been overall quite happy with the results. Only rarely had I to resort to Google search (!g).
During the last month or two, however, I've found myself using the !g switch and Google search more than half of the time. DuckDuckGo shows no or few results where Google shows more (and useful) ones.
Still I don't want to give in. So:
- Have you also experienced this worsening of DuckDuckGo?
- Which other more privacy-respecting alternatives do you recommend?
Track Person of Interest new episodes, see when is the next episode air date, series schedule, trailer, countdown, calendar and more. TV show guide for Person of Interest.
Does anyone have some thinkfan setting for Thinkpad X1E4 (X1 Extreme gen 4) to share? Cheers!
[Mod: not sure if this kind of question fits this community; please delete if it doesn't and accept my apologies]
Edit: explicitly downgrading to 10.1 with
sudo apt install wine-staging=10.1~focal-1 wine-staging-amd64=10.1~focal-1 wine-staging-i386:i386=10.1~focal-1 winehq-staging=10.1~focal-1
worked for me, but see other solutions posted below.
Thank you for the help!
----
On Ubuntu, the last apt upgrade of Wine broke down, bringing down the whole apt system:
The following packages have unmet dependencies. wine-staging : Depends: wine-staging-amd64 (= 10.2~focal-2) but 10.2~focal-1 is installed
At the suggestion of running sudo apt --fix-broken install, this is what happens:
Unpacking wine-staging-amd64 (10.2~focal-2) over (10.2~focal-1) ... dpkg: error processing archive /var/cache/apt/archives/wine-staging-amd64_10.2~focal-2_amd64.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/opt/wine-staging/bin/wine', which is also in package wine-staging-i386:i386 10.2~focal-2 dpkg-deb: error: paste subprocess was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Errors were encountered while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/wine-staging-amd64_10.2~focal-2_amd64.deb E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
Apparently this is also happening on Linux Mint: https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=441158
Any suggestions? Cheers!
Read Onepunch-Man (ONE) manga online, read hot free manga in mangafox.
New One Punch Man (original) chapter out!
https://fanfox.net/manga/onepunch_man_one/c152/1.html
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/33867210
> Here's a little physics riddle. It's really meant as a moment of self-reflection for physics teachers (I invite you to compare what answers you'd give within Relativity Theory). > > We're in the context of Newtonian mechanics. > > There are three small bodies. In the inertial coordinate system (t, x, y, z), we know the following about the three bodies (at a given instant of time): > > - The first has mass 3 kg > - The second has velocity (1, 0, 0) m/s > - The third has momentum (2, 0, 0) kg⋅m/s > > Now consider a new coordinate system (t', x', y', z') related to the first by the following transformation (a Galileian boost): > > t' = t, x' = x - u⋅t, y' = y, z' = z > with u = 1 m/s > > Questions: > > - What is the mass of the first body in the new coordinate system? > - What is the velocity of the second body in the new coordinate system? > - What is the momentum of the third body in the new coordinate system? > > Can you give definite answers to these three questions, and motivate your answers with simple physical principles? Note that by "definite answer" I don't necessarily mean an answer with a definite numerical value.
Here's a little physics riddle. It's really meant as a moment of self-reflection for physics teachers (I invite you to compare what answers you'd give within Relativity Theory).
We're in the context of Newtonian mechanics.
There are three small bodies. In the inertial coordinate system (t, x, y, z), we know the following about the three bodies (at a given instant of time):
- The first has mass 3 kg
- The second has velocity (1, 0, 0) m/s
- The third has momentum (2, 0, 0) kg⋅m/s
Now consider a new coordinate system (t', x', y', z') related to the first by the following transformation (a Galileian boost):
t' = t, x' = x - u⋅t, y' = y, z' = z with u = 1 m/s
Questions:
- What is the mass of the first body in the new coordinate system?
- What is the velocity of the second body in the new coordinate system?
- What is the momentum of the third body in the new coordinate system?
Can you give definite answers to these three questions, and motivate your answers with simple physical principles? Note that by "definite answer" I don't necessarily mean an answer with a definite numerical value.
Involute gears are everywhere: toys, kitchen appliances, cars. But what's so special about their shape?
Academic Journal Publishers Antitrust Litigation On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit on behalf of plaintiff Lucina Uddin in federal court in New York against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevie...
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/29254007
> https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/academic-journals/ > > "On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis, Sage, Wiley, and Wolters Kluwer, on behalf of a proposed class of scientists and scholars who provided manuscripts or peer review, alleging that these publishers conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research." >
Academic Journal Publishers Antitrust Litigation On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit on behalf of plaintiff Lucina Uddin in federal court in New York against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevie...
https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/academic-journals/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2024/09/16/scientists-file-antitrust-lawsuit-against-six-journal-publishers/
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/academic-publishers-face-class-action-over-peer-review-pay-other-restrictions-2024-09-13/
"On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis, Sage, Wiley, and Wolters Kluwer, on behalf of a proposed class of scientists and scholars who provided manuscripts or peer review, alleging that these publishers conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research."
"Deutsche Bank aptly describes the Scheme as a “bizarre” “triple pay system” whereby “the state funds most of the research, pays the salaries of most of those checking the quality of the research, and then buys most of the published product.”"
