But we would eat Kraft Dinner
Of course we would, we’d just eat more
And buy really expensive ketchups with it
That’s right, all the fanciest-, Dijon ketchup, mm, mm
But we would eat Kraft Dinner
Of course we would, we’d just eat more
And buy really expensive ketchups with it
That’s right, all the fanciest-, Dijon ketchup, mm, mm
Stupid people require oxygen to live.
No, TUDO is too dough.
It’s contextual. If it’s used in a phone number, it’s a pound sign. If it’s placed before a number, it’s a number sign. If it’s placed before a tag, it’s a hash/hashmark/hashtag.
No one would pronounce “#foo” as “pound foo” any more than they’d call a #2 pencil a “pound two pencil”. Because “pound” is clearly not the right name in either context.
Americans have been comfortable using different names for the symbol in different contexts since long before hashtags even existed. So when websites started using them and referred to them as “hashtags”, that was fine. It was a new context so it could use whichever name it wanted. (Well, “octothorpe-tag” is probably far too unwieldy to catch on.)
Of course if we’re talking about the symbol without a specific context, then we have to pick one of the names. For most Americans, that “default” name is probably still “pound”. Twenty years ago I’d definitely say that, but even then it wasn’t ubiquitous. It wasn’t uncommon to hear it referred to as a hash. And it seems like the use of “pound” has declined and the use of hash has increased as people now spend more time online and less time dialing phone numbers. There’s also a generational divide with older people more likely to say “pound” and younger people more likely to say “hash”.
Are you implying that my math professors do not think math and logic are important just because they used ≠
instead of !=
?
I don’t know but it definitely doesn’t look like wine.
You would rank them once.
If we were taking the top 5 candidates in a FPTP election, once a candidate receives 16.66% of the vote they would be guaranteed to get a seat because it’s impossible for 5 other candidates to also have at least 16.66% of the vote. So the election threshold in this election is 16.66%. In general when selecting n winners, it is 1 / (n+1).
The scoring takes place in rounds and every round either a candidate will earn a seat or a candidate will be removed (votes can be reallocated to them in later rounds so they’re not permanently out).
When a candidate exceeds the election threshold they win a seat and their excess votes are then redistributed to the other candidates. Suppose Rep1 wins the first round by 1 million votes over the election threshold. Their excess votes are redistributed based on what the voters’ next preferred candidate is. E.g. Of the voters who voted for Rep1, 70% had Rep2 as their next choice and 30% had Rep3 as their next choice. So Rep2 earns 700,000 votes and Rep3 earns 300,000 votes. Then the next round of scoring begins.
If no candidate reaches the election threshold that round, the votes from the lowest scoring candidate are eliminated and their votes are redistributed based on the voters’ next choice similar to how the excess votes from a winner are redistributed (except now it’s 100% of their votes). Then onto the next round.
If we assume that everyone votes down party lines, then every time votes are redistributed (whether because a seat was won or because a candidate was eliminated that round) the votes would only be redistributed to someone of their same party. If Democrats have 33% of the vote, then when a Republican wins a seat the excess votes just get redistributed to other Republicans. When a Democrat candidate is removed from a round their votes just go to the next Democrat candidates. The Republicans aren’t taking away any of the Democrats’ slice of the pie. Inside that blue slice there might be several rounds of shuffling votes around until one of them reaches the election threshold but none of the Democrat votes would ever get redistributed to the Republicans.
No, The Pirate Bay didn’t exist until 2003
His name isn’t Adam. He just makes a comparison between himself and Adam from the Bible. The quote is:
Remember that I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed.
I’ve used signal to buy molly
It’s useful when vim is being run from a different program or script.
For example, if I run p4 change
to create a new Perforce changelist it will open up my editor (which I have set to vim) so that I can enter the CL description and other fields. If I realize I don’t actually actually want to create the CL yet I can use :cq to quit with an error so that p4
knows to abort.
I also have a script I use for diffing a list of file pairs. It runs vimdiff on the first pair of files then if I exit with :qa it will move on to the next pair of files. But if I exit with :cq it will just abort and skip all of the remaining file pairs.
I agree that it’s the most obvious choice, but it also doesn’t work when there are hidden buffers open. :qa! and :cq should always work so they are arguably more correct
…Annnnnnnnnd now he’s dropped out.
Emmer Drops Speaker Bid After Right-Wing Backlash https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/24/us/politics/house-speaker-election.html
RIP to a legend
For the last couple decades, Phil was an outspoken advocate for organ donations thanks to a donor named Cody who saved his life. Every concert he would ask people to consider becoming an organ donor. If you’re not already, think about it. As Phil said, you could “save the life of someone you’ll never meet”.