It's a fumbled metaphor, mixing absolute and relative numbers, and I think it's supposed to say "pull out nine blue fish".
The point the article is making is that the "reporter" turned up and alledged to have found nine cases of daycare fraud. Nine sounds like a lot, right? But the article claims the state already knew 50% of the daycares claiming its aid were frauds (this is quite debatable, don't take it as fact). Presumably that's 50% of hundreds or maybe thousands of daycares.
If blue fish were much rarer in the pond, i.e. lower percentage of daycares defrauding the government, you'd be considered a savant for fishing once and pulling out nine blue fish... but if the pond has thousands of fish and 50% are blue, it looks a lot less impressive.
Part of my headcanon for Sneakers is that Agent Abbot (Jones) is actually Admiral Greer (Jones' character from The Hunt for Red October/Patriot Games/Clear and Present Danger), set a bit earlier in his career, and going under a codename while working CyberOps for NSA ;-)
no, mmap is a system call; the memory allocators tend not to use syscalls (often at all) as objection instantiation is very common; also it has to be concurrent and what not.
I hope that Peter, Caitlin and Leslie aren't reading this - if you are, STOP IT.
One of the minor villains in my D&D campaign is a literal living nightmare - one of three. Each one is named after a time of night when they appear, and this one is named 2:30 - because he really likes the nightmare where your teeth all fall out.
He's the spookiest one of them all, but the least dangerous.
Is there a 2010-era feature you're relying on that LibreOffice doesn't have yet?
When was the last security update for MS Office 2010? Wikipedia reckons sometime in late 2020. It might be worth looking at alternatives if you ever open potentially untrusted documents - maybe ones that appear to have been sent by people you know.
I'm not relying on anything in particular my current versions of Excel and Word. I'm just sticking with them through sheer inertia.
By default they don't allow macros (or editing/saving) documents downloaded from the Internet, which means I have to enable editing on documents I download. The few times a year I get a document from an untrusted source and don't want to open it on my computer, I open it with Google Docs.
If I'm ever forced to upgrade, I'll likely go with LibreOffice. But so far it ain't broke.
> At a Morgan Stanley conference this month, Brian Robins, finance chief for San Francisco-based software maker GitLab, said GitLab is aligned with the goals of DOGE, because the company’s software tools aim to help people do more with less.
> “What the Department of Government Efficiency is trying to do is what GitLab does,” Robins said.
I need to give a name to my theory which posits that horseshoe theory is a bullshit right-wing talking point, no different from the classic villain trope "We are not so different, you and I", where one side admits to being awful but uses false analogies to try and paint the other with the same brush, and the other rejects both the comparison and the conclusion.
The underlying goal of horseshoe theory is not to create a meaningful comparison between two positions, but an underhanded attempt to demoralise those on the left, and to swing undecided centrists by convincing them that the left isn't really offering the progress that it claims. I think it's also used as a shield by people who are right-leaning but don't want to admit it out loud.
...unless you can find a single good example of a notable left-wing proponent suggesting that horseshoe theory is valid, actually.
This and 1000 times this. It is so absurd: of course it seems ad hoc plausible to treat roughly similar things as if they were the same. However: never do this in this forum, since this is a community is looking a lot into all kinds details, so you will get called out.
But somehow – SOMEHOW – the same people that ask for nuance in everything act as if it would be even remotely plausible that the two most polar opposites of political theory would be basically the same for all important intents and purposes if thought to an end.
It is simply mind-blowing. People looking at something, seeing it is complex, stopping their thinking and just somehow feeling their way to the most empty assessment ever: "probably the same consequencesif you think it to the end". Without even having begun to think their way through it!
But I get it: thinking is nice as long as it is a purely intellectual endeavor but not if any personal moral responsibility is concerned. You might be morally obligated to draw consequences in your behavior – Heaven Forbid!
That takes a really long time though. Most domestic dogs can still breed with wild wolves after ~14,000 years of being pretty well separated by humans, and after some fairly substantial phenotypic shifts.
I don't get this. What does the proportion of blue fish have to do with the total number of fish you catch?
Is there some stats knowledge I'm missing?