@superkret@feddit.org Hab’s mittlerweile getestet. Funktioniert, kein Scam.

Jesus, Buddah, Spongebob! I don’t have time to be picky!

aborted cousin’s child

nenenee, so funktioniert das nicht.

You’ve made the point clear to me. Thank you.

Personally I don’t like ordering clothes online, but I did find this shop which seems to have made it its point to produce women’s pants with big pockets: https://radianjeans.com/ No clue if they’re any good, since I’m neither in the market for women’s pants nor in the US.

It’s hard to judge from photos, but some of these show women putting their whole hand in the pockets: https://oldnavy.gap.com/shop/womens-pants-with-pockets-0aaz06b

If you don’t like tiny pockets, then why did you buy pants with tiny pockets? I seriously don’t understand the logic.

Men’s underpants come with flies and without flies. Those without are usually cheaper. If I want a fly, I buy those with a fly. I don’t buy underpants without a fly and then complain that I didn’t get a fly.

I believe you that pants with big pockets are hard to find and that it’s effort to buy them. But that still doesn’t add any sense to buying pants with tiny pockets.

Could it be because women keep buying them? I’ve never seen my mother wear pants without pockets, and when she bought a new jacket, the amount and placement of pockets was the first thing on her mind.

Only now I realize the significance of that. But still. How hard is it to not buy pocketless apparel?

Jepp

Bildnisse dürfen nur mit Einwilligung des Abgebildeten verbreitet oder **öffentlich zur Schau gestellt **werden.

https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kunsturhg/__22.html

Testurteil: „Befriedigend”

A little joke for the Germans.

Schon das Aufnehmen des Fotos ist eine „Verarbeitung” nach DSGVO, da das Foto ja gespeichert wird.

deleted by creator

To save people a click: ISO is 51200 (in layman’s terms: holy shit it goes this high?) and they still exposed for 1/4s (somewhat normal for low-light photography) at an aperture of f/2.8 (gaping hole).

Suppose the average person p₀ has n acquaintances. Then a naive approach would say that each of p₀’s acquaintances (call one of them p₁) also has n acquaintances, leading p₀ with n² acquaintances of the second degree.

However, in a social network, many of p₁’s acquaintances are shared between p₀ and p₁. Let’s say that r⋅n (1/n≤r≤1) of p₁’s acquaintances are actually first-order acquaintances of p₀. The lower limit for r is 1/n because naturally one of p₁’s acquaintances is p₀ themselves.

This gives us n⋅(1−p)⋅n = n²⋅(1−p) as the number of second-degree acquaintances, if my math is mathing. Increase n for more extraverted people in the network, and increase p for more closely-knit networks.

To model the headline X % know someone who knows, we solve 1 / [n²⋅(1−p)] ≥ x where x is X% expressed as a fraction. Plugging in n=100 and p = 1/10 (I pulled these numbers out of my ass) and X=20% we get 1 / [100² ⋅ (1−.1))] = 1 / [ 10^4 ⋅ 0.9 ] = 1 / 900; again, if my math is mathing.

So this headline is true if about 1 in 900 people are in a relationship with AI.

Mir ist in der Fahrschule, vor ca. 7 Jahren, etwas aufgefallen: Immer wenn ich hochschaltete, beschleunigte ich danach wieder, bis ich den Motor deutlich hören konnte. Das habe ich auch bei einem anderen Fahrschüler beobachtet: Der ist im 4. Gang mit konstant 70 gefahren, dann kam die Aufforderung vom Fahrlehrer, mal hochzuschalten. Schüler folgt und beschleunigt danach auf 85.

Mir kam das so vor, als würden wir Anfänger intuitiv mehr Feedback vom Auto wollen.

No stars! They haven’t learned from their stupid mistake 60 years ago! /s

Gibt’s eine Erklärung zu dem Bild oder hat sich da wirklich nur jemand einen Spaß mit dem Azubi erlaubt?

“Asterix” being some spin on the latin word for “star”, aster.

😱 Ich habe damit auch vor ein paar Wochen angefangen. Geht es etwa zuende mit uns?

Du scheinst die Wartezeit in Sekunden zu messen.