If you could somehow track the frequency spectrum of usage, then you could mostly handle that problem. "Oh, the frequency spectrum strongly peaks at about once a week? I guess users regularly need to use this feature. Probably important somehow." vs "Huh, the frequency spectrum isn't strongly peaked anywhere, but is substantially lower at high frequencies. We can probably remove this."
Imagine a time keeping system where employees regularly enter their hours and schedule time off. But somewhere is a button or screen that gets used once a week called "run payroll". Aside from being periodic and not available to everyone, no metrics can capture how important it is.
Never the less, my favorite thing to do with code is running over it with the delete key. Just be careful about what gets it ;-)
I think the parent means that the mean time between podcast deletions is two weeks, not that they are spread exactly two weeks apart. If the deletions are random but on average every two weeks, then your frequency spectrum will show nothing meaningful either.
Kaku is a media sensationalist; that class of person has a terrible track record. Futurists, that is, people like Aasimov, have an ok track record at predicting the future. Interestingly, early futurist predictions about digital tech were pretty good. For "physical" goods? Not so much. A plausible explanation of this discrepancy is that they didn't predict the breakdown in the historial trend of increasing energy usage. See the Henry Adams curve.
"What I would suggest is to start taking the extra time to optimize your resume for every job you apply for. There are tools online to help you find out how these softwares scan and pick out pieces of your resume."
Is there one tool to rule them all, or a host for each specialty?
It's been quite awhile since I've needed to update my resume, and with the latest advancements of AI, I'm not sure which one leads the pack. I'm sure a bit of research would find you with some options.
>place an odalisque with an inscription on it
Besides being cruel, odalisques aren't known to exist for more than a hundred or so years. Let alone millennia.
Neil Cicierega has a number of "Mouth..." albums, each more deranged than the last. Mouth Silence, Mouth Sounds, Mouth Moods, Mouth Dreams. The opening to Mouth Dreams haunts my nightmares.
Highly recommended.
SoundCloud is my preferred source: https://soundcloud.com/neilcic. There are also some one-off tracks that don't show up on the "Mouth..." albums, like "Bustin" and "Dear Dinosaur".
Problem sets are useful for improving your mathematical ability, as is looking at an expert's attempt at a problem after your attempt. Both are a core part of reading books well. So when someone asks for books to improve their mathematical ability, a likely interpretation is just "they want books with good problem sets, clear presentation and elegance". Another interpretation is "what's a book which, when after I intrepret all the individual sentences into a vague impression, will make me good at maths?"
Your answer is somewhat helpful in the latter sort of world where OP didn't know how to read a textbook (which is unfortunately common) but not in the former sort. You seem to be venting though, which is understandable. But venting with a side of helpful content would be even better.
For instance, advising OP on how to to read a maths book (generate content yourself, check dependancies, connect things to what you know etc.) or suggest books which contain advise like this alongside their main content (I think Tao's analysis texts might do this?)
I tried using this for a technical talk[1], and it got the amount of speakers wrong. Which is somewhat suprising to me, as I would have thought diarization tech would just worked by now.
I'm gonna give it a try with your video. If I may ask how many speakers are there in this video. (I have to go through all of it otherwise). From what I can see, we have a teacher who is speaking most of the times and then few laughs from students in the background.
There are a couple of people interejecting with answers to questions, or asking questions. I'm afraid I don't have a better estiamte than that. But in this case, I think lumping the students together as one speaker and the teacher as another would be fine.
The FAQ contains re-states the content for point 14 in point 13. Point 14 is about why your code might be slower when using 2.0. 13 should be about how to keep up with PT 2.0 developments. Someone should change that.
