humodz

Theres even one that says "Bib [sic] is a highly reliable partner."

It would be amusing if archaeologists in the future also end up spending countless hours trying to decipher my shopping lists and poor math skills

The tone of this and Chris's post gives me the impression that it's harmful to include these query parameters, but I don't understand how. Could someone elucidate me? I understand it can mangle some URLs and that's good enough reason not do it, but even then it seems like a minor incovenience.

Yeah, it ties up the game perfectly

> The difference between 75 (usually a beautiful day) and 85 (hot) is 23.8C to 29.4C.

If you convert a nice, round number from one system to the other, you'll end up with a more precise, less nice number, which will give the impression that Celsius is harder to use.

In reality, people from metric countries just think in 5-degree increments: 25 is a beautiful day, 30 is hot. It doesn't feel any harder to read than Fahrenheit.

I wonder if there are people that moved to the U.S., switched to Fahrenheit and now find it more intuitive than Celsius. If one is easier than the other, I assume it still doesn't make up for the hurdle of learning a new system.

With GOG you can download the games's installer, vy backing up those you can still install your games even if you get banned

Off the top of my head: going in-person to the bank, email, phone call or sms to a number that you previously informed to the bank (say when opening the account), otp a la authy or aegis. None of these require you to be on google or apple's walled garden.

Do you mind elaborating why a db partitioned like that is not enough for your registration example? If the partitioning is based on the email address, then you know where the new user's email has to be if exists, you don't need to query all partitions.

For example, following your partitioning logic, if the user registers as [email protected], we'd need to query only partition j.

I should've clarified that, but I wanted to find out how to do it as a single person.

1. Grab at least 4 cards of each suit

2. Sort them to follow a repeating pattern of 4 distinct suits, e.g. ♥♦♣♠♥♦♣♠♥♦♣♠...

2. Cut the deck, putting the top part under the bottom part

3. (The deck will still have that pattern, but shifted by an unknown amount)

4. Counting out from the top, remove the following cards:

- 1st, 5th, 9th, 13th

- 2nd, 6th

- 3rd, 7th

Or: take 3, skip 1, take 3, skip 1, take 1, skip 3, take 1

Each of these groups will be of the same suit, so the deck should have the figgy distribution.

> Sampling uniformly such that each distance is equally likely across the line gives at least a 90% chance of choosing a rational.

Let's say the numbers are targets on the line. Your distribution implies the range 1-9 is less dense with targets than the range 9-10. Doesn't that mean you're less than 90% likely to hit something between 1-9?

> You are NOT more likely to throw a dart that lands in 9+ just because you have magically introduced an infinitely tense series of irrationals in that range.

If we turn this around, by forbidding a bunch of values in the 1-9 range from being hit, then won't the probabilities get skewed towards the 9-10 range?

There's the Cobra Effect popularized by Freakonomics

Too many cobras > bounty for slain cobras > people start breeding them for the bounty > law is revoked > people release their cobras > even more cobras around

Yeah, it'd much appreciated if the author explained that a bit more in the "why is saml insecure?" section