I don't mean to say that you would be incapable of imagining each of the details of a piece. What I mean is that at any given moment, you're only paying attention to a small part of the piece while your brain fills in the rest with an approximation so it appears as if you hear the whole thing at once.
Pretty sure there would've been a whole lineup of more competent people waiting to take his place if he dies.
I feel like this could just be a result of your brain being very good at fooling you into thinking you perceive something when you don't. It's kind of like how you can "see" a huge landscape in very fine details, but really the only part you actually see well is the centre of your visual field.
Interesting read, but where's the science?
Maybe basketball needs to be divided into two leagues for over and under 6'6". Perhaps hockey should be split by bone density. Or whatever,
Maybe not split, but we should take this into account for scoring purposes. In powerlifting, your height (and thus weight) is the main determining factor in how much you can lift. We account for this by using weight classes, but that has the problem of either dividing up everyone so finely that many weight categories in local competitions only comprise of one athlete, or grouping too many people together that competition is no longer fair. There's also the Wilk score (getting replaced last I heard due to some drama. Not sure what they use now), which calculates an overall score based on your exact weight and allows comparisons across weight classes.
So for other sports, we could have something similar to this Wilk score. In basketball for example, it could determine how much each basket is worth for each team based on the composition of the team. It wouldn't be perfect, but it's probably a lot better than dividing across gender lines, and would open up competition to people who enjoy the game but aren't insanely tall.
Interesting to see how common it still is to exclusively use cash, especially in European countries. In Canada, they put us in a prisoners dilemma situation where things cost the same regardless of whether you pay cash or card, but if you pay card, the merchant pays a fee and you get a portion of that fee, making it cheaper for you, while also raising the prices because they need to factor in this extra fee, so things are actually more expensive overall, and moreso if you pay cash.
Besides the monetary incentives, it's also much easier to track my expenses with a credit card.
If you enjoy good bread but don't like pizza crust, then you just haven't had good pizza.
It just seems to me that by this definition, the moment we figure out how to do something with a computer, it ceases to be AI because it no longer requires human intelligence to accomplish.
Communauté Discord: https://discord.gg/VXpBsQ7S
Ça a été créé à partir du subreddit r/makefriendsmtl dans le but d'aider les gens à se rencontrer et à se faire de nouveaux amis. Très actif avec des activités en personne et en ligne. La plupart des conversations sur le Discord se déroulent en anglais, mais il y a aussi beaucoup de francophones parmi nous.
If it did, it didn't enforce uniqueness (I know this because I've had multiple accounts and only one phone), so you could just as easily use a temporary phone number.
Legitimate questions, but why would it be worse for VPN companies?
The way I see it, I have no way of verifying the answers to any of these regardless of whether it's an ISP or a VPN, but I do know that VPNs have a greater incentive to provide you with proper privacy because if they were found to fail at this, the entire business dies. ISPs run no such risk, especially since many of them are effectively monopolies.
Why is #1 an issue? You're assuming physics at a subatomic level works the same as that at a macroscopic level, but they don't. Things don't have well defined boundaries.