It’s a completed piece of art or a completed task within the current capacity, but as a puzzle I consider it incomplete. She could still miraculously get those missing pieces and then the puzzle would be “more completed” in the same unit of measurement, which in my opinion just means that it isn’t complete now. Although, that raises the question if a puzzle with a few damaged pieces is complete… I hope the pieces remain missing. That’s a fantastic decoration idea!

I dig this question. I have a similar problem in my personal task management where I differentiate between efforts invested in general and efforts invested into completed tasks only. Since those are just solo projects, I don’t invest a lot of time into requirements measurement and the output of a task is rarely what I had in mind. Looking back my judgements on what is completed are very inconsistent and the numbers are rather meaningless :/

The first step would have been to read and process the suggestions in your already existing thread(s) instead of creating a new post with a slightly modified question.

Not really the meat of your question, but in my opinion it already lost its punch at its creation, given its etymology. I wish we would have hit the reset button and clarify that when “Semites” and “antisemite” refer to only Jews, it’s only in the historical context of Nazi Germany. Sometimes I wonder, if I should simply use antisemitism for the hatred against Palestine, too, and that without any context or explanation.

This year I’ve hardly watched any movies on my own so far. I think my other hobbies simply demand more time and there is nothing I urgently want to watch currently. Even the movies I only slightly desire to watch are just some of my favorite movies like Akahige that I haven’t seen in a long time.

Yes, recently I complained about a local goon and accidentally accused them of being a Gen Alpha, but they were late Gen Z. To prevent incorrect generational discrimination I propose an extension of the generations in the format {generation label}-{birth datetime in ISO 8601}-{country code}:{postalcode}-{firstname}:{lastname}-{random-id}. Now I can correctly complain how the “GenZ-2007-05-01T09:00:00Z-de:33604-Lazlo-Ailton- 16b849e3-3368-4df0-b4c1-56e9cf46c5fb” are lazy slowpokes who will be the doom of the world.

Unfortunately I fail to do it regularly, but I love it. On the one hand it helps me to wrap up the day, clear my head and fall asleep. On the other hand I love to reflect on snapshots of my past thoughts and experiences.

It also depends on the type of journal. For example I maintain a dream journal, too, which improves your dream recall. Furthermore discovering patterns, confusions and in general yourself in your dreams is fascinating.

Letters don’t have colors, but people may associate a specific color with a letter. It could be influenced by logos, symbols and just about anything that affected us personally in our life. It’s not a logical binding.

E.g. I can imagine that a lot of people will associate the letter “x” with the color red, because they are often displayed in that color, especially when it symbolizes deletion. Perhaps someone was a big fan of the pro wrestling stable D-Generation X and therefore they see x in a green color. Another person thinks of a black X, because they are addicted to Twitter.

However I think most of us don’t know why exactly we associate a color to a letter and it’s the result of a looooot of links and associations.

It’s just an experiment for now. See HN

It doesn’t hurt to make a sub-category community, but please also post to c/Music. I certainly hope that on Lemmy we can stop defaulting to the majority language and culture.

Well, people are people. It might be unpleasant and rude to systemically browse people, especially if you need to interrupt and clarify your prompts, basically treating them like chatbots.

The way I see it, you should differiante how you approach human and inhuman sources. Information from people have a lot of advantages, too. You might get your target information quickly without any “bloat” from e.g. an encyclopedia article. However you might lose a lot of key information. A person forces you into an interactive bi-directional conversation. They will get information from you and more likely add additional information you need.

For example you might get the commonly accepted translation of an ancient poem from an article. A human can give you that, too, but if they notice that you are absolutely not familiar with the subject, they might also clarify that a literal translation is not possible, that you need the context of this historical event and so on. In a inhuman source you might have skipped that information. This is how some people may use a trusted source, but still leave with fake news, because the extracted information is incomplete.

In reality you can’t reduce AI to replace only “Level 1 coding” and do only “typing”. It will make assumptions about these “Level 2 and 3” decisions in its generated code. To reduce or control it you have to invest more into documentation/instructions and code review. You basically change the focus based on the assumption that “Level 1 coding” with all of that “hand-crafted” code was such a big waste of time and money. But it’s a made-up problem.

On top of that a lot of vibe-coded projects that appear here and there seem to not even intend to let the AI do only the typing. They don’t just let the AI translate “flow” and “architecture” into code. They make the AI translate their demands into code.

The beginning confusion was an intentional trap by the author. The author’s real confusion comes only later.

Are non-Koreys and non-Martins allowed to answered this question?

They clearly meant the cumulative age when two of the four children are holding the controllers together (must be a new Gen Alpha & Beta activity). The youngest child is 2 years old, the twins are 3 years old and the big boss is already 5 years old. There is no other reasonable way to interpret this.

Uh, I think it’s the exact other way around. In practice most of the activity already is centralized in more general “melting pot” communities and the lack of engagement is the reason why the content is not distributed across the more specific communities.

Why is this situation not intentionally desirable (on paper)? Well, it kinda misses the whole point of the federation. Lemmy, despite decentralization, is currently more dependent on a few of its communities than the evil corpo social media. Then again, this just proves that technical centralization has always been a lesser issue with the traditional social media services and that activity is where activity is.

I still don’t like the idea of one big general community. I’m certain that a lot of the people here don’t want content just for the sake of content. Being forced to manually filter out most of the content would be a hot mess. On top of that, while activity might increase slightly in quantity, the quality would become even more superficial and shallow. For me personally, it’d be a reason to stop using Lemmy.

Yes, and I think a lot of immigrants and especially immigrants (grand-)children feel that way. We are lions in the sea and sharks in the woods. It’s always difficult to explain to teachers (those who mean well) that not only I do not feel like a German, but I don’t even consider it necessary. To me personally it’s positive. I like cultures and traditions and obviously they are still part of my identity. But I like that I don’t have the vulnerability of making them a bigger part of my identity than they need to be.

Did you hear him say “I’m in”?

I believe in causal determinism and personally I still believe in free will, because in a hypothetically undetermined existence where we have this magic power to make a decision, it makes an impact whether or not I believe in it. In a determined existence whether I’m aware of it or not doesn’t matter as it’s already determined.

When it comes to laws, ethics and judgements, I don’t think there is a clear solution, since all of this is built on the idea of free will and specifically accountability. We have this weird line, because only with time we took some levels of determinism into account for judging an action, e.g. psychological determinism.

I’m not sure where my line is. I guess in practice it makes sense that we can only consider determining causes where we can describe the events that lead to the action in detail (that too is vague and contextual). E.g. Tourette causing someone to say the n-word is more direct, clear and definitive than a traumatic event leading to abuse. Then again, it also means my lack of (specific) information in the chain of causation decides how I view someone.

He had wanted to call himself the Weekend, but there was already a rock band in Ontario called that, so he dropped a letter.

NY Times

When people tell you that AI will (or already does) take a lot of jobs, it’s not necessarily implied that it’s good enough to replace humans. Just that it is sold well enough to the people who make those decisions.