Yes, that is definitely a downside for these tests. The worst is when the text of some exception is printed and it includes line numbers. It does still require some discipline to think about what you're printing and avoid output that will be very noisy. This problem is mitigated quite a bit by the ease of accepting changes when these tests fail for obviously nonsense reasons though (just hit a couple buttons in an emacs buffer).
A very small number of people trade by voice on trading floors and they are generally professionals. This is categorically different from phone apps that reach into every ordinary person's living room. No one is advocating for a return to pre-electronic markets.
Derivatives have underlyings. An option is the right to purchase or sell a stock (or something else); a future is the right/obligation to accept delivery of something at a future time. While the payout curve is more complicated than straightforward ownership, they derive their value from their relation to some underlying assets.
I thought the underlying of a crypto coin ledger entry is the heat generated from the electricity consumed to calculate the hash of a meaningless number?
What about the AMC ou GME stocks? And if as you seem to imply, crypto is useless, then why isn't everyone shorting it to 0? Obviously you'll concede the stock market is not solely rooted on the underlying assets or dividend, but also on hype and future promise. Same thing for cryptocurrencies, only less utility and more speculation.
We switched to Skyr and now all other yogurts taste disgustingly sweet to me. I've been cutting sugar way back and even a regular Boba tea was grossly sweet now. I'm taking it to mean this is working!
Basically, you have to go to specialty food stores (the arabian ones are really awesome from my experience) to actually find yogurt that's deserving of the name. For some reason the yogurt sold in regular supermarkets in the US is 'low fat' and 'strange consistency'.
I'm honestly glad to hear that, it's been a while since I've been to the US and I was quite confused about the yogurt-availability back then :D
(Or maybe I was just unlucky and in an anti-full-fat-yogurt part of the country.)
If you don't allocate, you won't garbage collect. GC pauses would be really bad, but you can avoid them, or at least avoid them happening at bad times, if you're careful. It does requires knowing in some detail how Ocaml manages memory.
While I agree with the general point that basic and direct sentence structure is not always the right choice, there is no passive voice in the sentence you quoted.
"it is a truth universally acknowledged" -> impersonal construction
"a single man... must be in want of a wife" -> this is active voice, man is still the subject of the sentence and be is the the only verb. "Want" is a noun. See https://www.dictionary.com/browse/want, definition 14.
okay, you're right, i wasn't paying attention. shame on me. Still, I think it is a stretch to point to the use of this passive participle as the reason why this sentence works or doesn't work.
> okay, you're right, i wasn't paying attention. shame on me.
I find this attitude troubling in combination with the argument made all over this thread that you can tell the people who say not to use passives are full of it because they can't even identify a passive when they're looking at one. (And you're at least flirting with that argument in your comment above.)
It's completely true that the advice not to use passives is spurious. That advice is an American cultural phenomenon in the same way that advice not to sleep in a room with a running electric fan is a Korean cultural phenomenon, and it's just as valid.
But it's kind of difficult to simultaneously make the arguments that (1) You don't know what you're saying; you can't even tell whether a verb is passive or not, and (2) OK, this verb is passive and I didn't notice, but that shouldn't take anything away from my arguments.
I'd prefer to see the case for passive usage made based on the actual purpose the passive serves (letting you rearrange the elements of the sentence, so that the order in which they are presented better suits the overall flow of the discourse) than based on gotchas.
I think maybe you're getting the wrong impression about the tone I intend (my fault, I am not putting a lot of effort into tone or careful writing). I realize that what I wrote can be read very passive aggressively. I meant it more
just as acknowledging that I made a dumb mistake and chiding myself for it. In person, that would have been clearer.
This week has been busy and stressful and I wrote both comments quickly and off the cuff. It's not that I can't tell that acknowledged is a passive participle, it's just that I didn't even look at it because I was pattern matching against common mistakes I've seen people make. It was only afterwards that I noticed that the parent comment specifically pointed to the word "acknowledged."
> I find this attitude troubling in combination with the argument made all over this thread that you can tell the people who say not to use passives are full of it because they can't even identify a passive when they're looking at one. (And you're at least flirting with that argument in your comment above.)
This is not what I'm saying, and it's not the argument I would make if I were actually making an argument. I said very few words, and not very carefully chosen ones, and you're putting words into my mouth. I made no case for or against passive voice. I just thought I saw a mistake briefly and I was trying to point it out.
Google is in fact allowing its employees to take their desktop monitors home, which I first discovered when I saw someone walking out through the lobby with one on Monday and thought it was hilarious, only for that to be repeated.
It's funnier because this is the NYC office and no one drives, so he was probably lugging it all the way through the subway system.
But what's the point in buying one if I only need it for a few weeks? I don't want to generate extra trash and those in the office are currently unused.
If you don't already have a monitor at home it's because you don't want one. So it doesn't make sense to spend $500 for something you'll use in a temporary WFH situation, then lose money getting rid of it once WFH starts. Much better to just bring the work monitor home for the duration of WFH.
Incidentally I do already have a monitor at home, that costs more than $500. And I'm not using it for WFH, because I find my 15" work laptop sufficient.
I wonder as well. I did a project with him when I was a teenager and we didn't entirely get along. He was a very talented guy, though, and I wasn't entirely fair to him. I hope he's doing all right.
I don't get it, I don't understand how the author of the article has a PhD if this is what he thinks. Like,
> Why do advanced-math classes bother with proofs almost no student can follow?
Because that literally _is_ mathematics, and the point of working through them is because students can actually understand them and learn to do the same thing with new problems. How does he expect anyone to create or discover anything new with just arithmetic 101?
There's a kernel of a good argument in that signaling probably is one of the main values that students get from a college degree, but it's overstated to such a degree that it crosses over into idiocy.
Economic signaling is a thing in economics [0] and it isn't talked about much as while they are jobs that do "require" college degrees while not really using the education taught and thus just essentially use it as a signal, most economists think lots of useful concepts taught in school are used in higher skilled jobs requiring degrees and thus aren't just used as a signal.
This guy likely just picked an economic topic that isn't talked about much and wrote a book about it to sell his brand/make money by focusing on the minority cases and using clickbait articles like this where he equates all college degrees as useless signalling and thus not worth the cost of education to promote it.
Also, it is not actually true that almost no students can follow math class. Math classes too difficult to be followed by literally most get easier over time. The article author exaggerate on those points to the point of lying, so that it is easier to make points.
Also I did not spend all that much time by history or poetry in school. It is possible to select overly too many such courses I guess, but it is in no way necessary or expected.
Did you read his link? It directly addresses your point. I will summarize and add some context, since I don't know if you read Russian. The word мир in Russian has two meanings, "peace" and something that is translated in different contexts more like "the world" or "society." These were once different words with different spellings, but during the Soviet Union, authorities decided that some letters had to be purged because they were naughty, so orthographic reforms were carried out that standardized some spellings and eliminated a few letters. So the previously distinguishable words "мир"(peace) and мір (the world/society) became orthographically indistinguishable. However, since Tolstoy published prior to the Soviet Union, you can tell what the likely intent was by how the title was spelled in pre-revolutionary publications. In almost all cases, it was spelled мир. There is just one instance when it was spelled мiр, and it seems likely that it was a misprint.
> but during the Soviet Union, authorities decided that some letters had to be purged because they were naughty
Just for reference, the grammatical reform had been designed during the tsarist times, started by the ephemeral Provisional Government, and only finished by the Soviets.
