For example, native English speakers often make phonetic spelling errors (such as its/it’s, your/you’re) that non-native English speakers usually avoid. It’s probably a sign that someone speaks more fluently when he starts making these types of mistakes from time to time.
Or picked up English before they learned to read and write properly.
I'm cursed with this as I was put in an international environment right before turning five, went back to my home country to start grade school and only in fifth grade started having English classes.
There is some LLM trained only with old content, maybe someone can describe a style invented after the more recent content and told the AI to do a novel with that style and see what the result is and compare it to the "real" style.
Nuclear + Batteries could be nice too because the reactors will be always working at optimal rate without having to start/stop them to adapt to demand and let the storage manage peaks and lows. So investment in one domain can help the other too.
True. In any case references solve only half of the problem because it lets you state "this function will not take a null pointer". You still cannot say "this function may take a null pointer" unless you use a very unusual convention of saying that any pointer argument may take a null pointer.
I don't find that convention unusual. That's how I (and everyone at my company) writes code every day. If an argument is a pointer, that means it may be null. If it may not be null, it should be a reference.
Technically there isn't a recession but, if you split by sectors, you see that all sectors not related to the AI investment boom are in the red. The question is: is it a natural consequence of investment shift to better technologies or a real problem that is temporarily hidden by an AI bubble ?
Is there a particular meaning to 'active/inactive' that I don't know that justifies your out-of-proportion outrage? What is the problem with observing that 35% of Americans just don't care enough about this subject to go vote ?
The people you are replying to are trying to have a meaningful discussion by providing references and some basic argumentation. Can you add some link or arguments that explain more strongly your point of view instead of using strong affirmations ('misinformation', 'debunked', 'nonsensical') without any trace of argumentation and no reference at all ?
reply