The company is based in an EU, EEA, EFTA, or DCFTA member country.
So Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia included, but not Turkey (only tariff union), neither are Belarus, Russia, UK, and much of the Balkans. Iceland is included, Greenland isn’t, Faroer should be via Iceland, same goes for Monaco via France, San Marino via Italy etc. Switzerland in particular is included because EFTA.
Mostly they’re dried, including pod, the rest is genetics.
They are botanically nuts, though: They are indehiscent, meaning they do not open to release their seeds. They’re also fruit. It’s e.g. pine nuts which aren’t nuts because pine cones do indeed open and release the seeds. Of which you should roast a couple and mush up with a wee bit of garlic, a metric pound of basil, some salt, some proper hard cheese, and quantum satis good olive oil. Use a mortar the basil wants to get squeezed, pre-chop everything or you’re going to be there forever. Throw your pasta, shape is not that important as long as it’s bronze-cut, into a pan at lowish heat, put your pesto on top, add some of that pasta water (incl. the starch in there), the saponids in the garlic will help with emulsifying everything. Reduce very carefully you don’t want to denature the cheese.
I guess making a distinction, in the culinary context, between nuts and peanuts makes sense because allergy considerations, legumes are a class of their own there.
Tigers are territorial and solitary but quite social, they don’t usually get into fights when they meet, that only happens when they have an actual territorial conflict because there’s too many tigers on too little land. They’re perfectly fine with others visiting their prowling grounds, they might even hunt together, just don’t overstay your welcome. Actually not that terribly different from how humans treat their houses.
Everything that comes out of a petrochemical plant can be made without oil, in fact BASF had recipes in place for decades now and is switching sources as the price shifts. Push come to shove they can produce everything from starch. It’s also why they hardly blinked when Russia turned off the gas.
The carbon that actually ends up in steel is a quite negligible amount (usually under 1%, over 2% you get cast iron), you can get that out of the local forest, and to reduce the iron hydrogen works perfectly, the first furnances are already online.
That implies that we can make electricity everywhere, which is technically true but not really the case because there’s countries with more and with less free space, with more suitable places and less suitable places to put renewables.
Those ammonia tankers will happen. At that point btw we’re not just talking about electricity, but also chemical feedstock.
Not to mention ARM chips which by and large were/are more efficient on the same node than x86 because of their design: ARM chip designers have been doing that efficiency thing since forever, owing to the mobile platform, while desktop designers only got into the game quite late. There’s also some wibbles like ARM insn decoding being inherently simpler but big picture that’s negligible.
Intel just really, really has a talent for not seeing the writing on the wall while AMD made a habit out of it out of sheer necessity to even survive. Bulldozer nearly killed them (and the idea itself wasn’t even bad, it just didn’t work out) while Intel is tanking hit after hit after hit.
See there’s the stuff that happened, there’s the version that tankies want to believe (complete denial), which is actually different from the official CCP stance (“necessary and proportionate police action to ensure stability”, with the implication “enough questions, comrade, nothing more to see”), which is different from western public… myth, I have to say. Back when the stuff went down western journalists didn’t know what was happening, there were confusing reports, there were reports of violence, and then there was the tank man – taken the day after (IIRC, but definitely later and no he didn’t get run over). The collective imagination somehow constructed an image of the Chinese army rolling over students. Which is… metaphorically true, but not literally. And then the CCP is using that western imagination to spin their own tale of how the evil west is slandering them.
Lore books eh you’re giving me ideas. Hard to justify spending budget on that kind of stuff even if you have money to work with… how would one even get one’s hands on a woodprint artist? You know, the chisel and printing press kind? Imitating it is going to be hard indeed and figuring out how to do it not worth for a couple of one-off images you could just as well do without so either generating from prompt or telling the model to re-paint an input image in that style seems like the obvious solution.
I think a similar rule applies as when it comes to code, and NIH syndrome syndrome: Whatever it is that is your primary focus you should write yourself, use libraries for the rest. If you write a shooter, you’re going to write the gunplay, but can take the renderer off the shelf. I you’re writing a walking simulator that happens to have a gun somewhere but is generally focussed on graphical atmosphere, go grab the gunplay off the shelf but write the renderer yourself.
So unless the focus of your game is rummaging through books in an ancient library, go use that model.
If your stance is to have no or minimal defederation then lemmy.ml is not the right choice, lemm.ee is: Compare blocked instances here with the same here. Besides lemmy.ml apparently not cleaning up their blocks (e.g. exploding-heads is defunct) they block e.g. lemmynsfw.com. Not really political that’s just one that I recognised.
Also I couldn’t find a federation policy for lemmy.ml, while lemm.ee has clear rules.
Eh the massacring happened on side streets, local Peking residents were trying to keep the army from moving into the square not really knowing that other Peking residents had already briefed the army on who the protesters actually were, and what they wanted, and how they behaved. Once the army was on the square and set an ultimatum it was cleared with no or few casualties, the reports are a bit fuzzy.
That doesn’t excuse the CCP in one bit, of course, or rather it doesn’t excuse the hardline faction who couldn’t stomach that others in the party were actually talking to the protesters as that would set a precedent that you can just turn up on the square and get an audience with the party, or maybe more precisely could boost the influence of one party faction over the whole.
The whole situation really can’t be divorced from Hu Yaobang and his role in the party: The protests were essentially a wake for him and his ideas. Which the hardliners thoroughly buried afterwards and the situation in China hasn’t improved to the point where Chinese would even be comfortable to criticise that decision – you’d get invited for tea, if you can catch on to the euphemism.
If it had been up to the hardliners yes the army would’ve massacred the whole square, if that hadn’t been their intention they wouldn’t have mischaracterised the nature of the protest towards the army. Without ordinary Peking citizens stepping in, and getting butchered for it, that massacre would have happened.
And yes the Uygur situation is a genocide that’s without question or asterisk.
Never had an issue with them but then I live in Europe, where auto-adjusting/adaptive lights aren’t just legal it’s a requirement if you want to make the headlights permanent high-beams.
Quick intuition boost for the non-believers: What do things look like if you’re standing on the surface of the bowling ball? Are feather and earth falling towards you at the same speed, or is there a difference?
As to “what’s falling faster” my point is still that everything’s falling at the same speed, because the only non-arbitrary reference point to measure things from is the centre of gravity of the whole system, earth, feather, ball, all of them together.
Well it may still be arbitrary, but at least it’s not geocentric or feathercentric or ballcentric. All three can be unhappy with the choice which means it’s fair.
Flip that reference point to the earth though and yes the ball is approaching ever so slightly faster than the feather (side note: is our earth spherical or are we at least making it an oblong?). Flip it to the ball and the feather is falling a lot slower towards it than the earth is. Which is probably how I should have started explaining this: The mass difference between feather and earth with respect to the ball is so massive that it actually makes quite a difference while between feather and ball wrt. earth it’s negligible.
I understand and agree with red’s math, and I said no such thing as you put into quotation marks there.
Clarity of presentation is never a trivial matter. You can be right all you like if you don’t get it across then it will be for nought but inflating your own ego.
You said it was movement, aka change in position over time, not acceleration, or you would have said “x will accelerate at”, not “earth will move at”. I already explained why it’s questionable as a term of acceleration.
And this could’ve been over after a single comment of you saying “oh, yeah, misspoke”. Your math in the comment after that misbegotten term checks out, that’s not the issue here, it’s your presentation that went all haywire.
That’s not what you wrote, or at least not what I complained about. You wrote:
BUT earth will move with gM/m1
where it was previously established that m1 and M are masses, and I interpreted g to be G (Newton’s gravitational constant) instead of g as in “gravitational acceleration caused by earth” because… well, I’m not actually sure. The whole thing is already a mess of capitalisation but more importantly then it’d be acceleration, not movement, worse, the specific properties of the earth are included twice (once in g, then in one of the mass terms).
the fact that i wasted my time on low iq person like you
Maybe you should spend less time on insulting people and more on communicating your thoughts clearly.
you idiot i was talking about accelwration,
Then why did you say “move” instead of “accelerate”. And the units don’t match acceleration, either. Best I can tell it’s some fraction of a term. If you want it to be an acceleration then you’re missing a squared distance, and if you want it to be acceleration, why are both mass terms in there.
For someone who throws around things like “that’s non-technical brainrot” damn is your prose fuzzy.
It’s not nonsense when it makes people understand, buddy. And don’t get all “oh be technical” on me when you say things like “earth will move with <something with the same units as G>”. Something that’s definitely something, but not m/s.
inertial frame
I was talking about time-steps when I said frame. Hence “simulation”, and “one frame, then another, then another”, referencing successive moments in time.
The problem is: Data is code, and code is data. An algorithm to compute prime numbers is equivalent to a list of prime numbers, (also, not relevant to this discussion, homoiconicity and interpretation). Yet we still want to make a distinction.
Is a PAQ-compressed copy of the Hitchhiker’s guide code? Technically, yes, practically, no, because the code is just a fancy representation of data (PAQ is basically an exercise in finding algorithms that produce particular data to save space). Is a sorting algorithm code? Most definitely, it can’t even spit out data without being given an equally-sized amount of data. On that scale, from code to code representing data, AI models are at least 3/4th towards code representing data.
As such I’d say that AI models are data in the same sense that holograms (these ones) are photographs. Do they represent a particular image? No, but they represent a related, indexable, set of images. What they definitely aren’t is rendering pipelines. Or, and that’s a whole another possible line of argument: Requiring Turing-complete interpretation.