Just having time in the evening to cook isn’t enough to get home cooking done. You need the energy to do it too, availability of fresh ingredients, and consistency in your schedule to allow planning ahead so that it’s actually economical to cook at home.
I say we blame the system for these problems. Parents can always do more, but it’s never clear if the outcome outweighs the cost, so I wouldn’t blame them for making the choices they do.
A native English speaker would likely read that title to mean that the priest was the one holding the paintbrush.
So, is this Trump technically fulfilling his campaign promise of lowering egg prices?
Try going into debt. You know, for fun.
Is it actually secret like how the Epstein Island is secret, or “secret” in that no one pays any attention to it because it doesn’t cater to us?
wtf 50k? I’ve never had a card go over 2k, and the highest I’ve ever been offered was 5k. I can’t imagine the level of wealth you’d need to spend that much in a month.
It seems you might have different assumptions on who works which jobs. Factory workers span the whole range of people who are great at thinking and people who are bad at thinking. So do scientists/engineers/doctors. I don’t think I would agree that only those “who are worst at thinking use AI the most”, but if it were the case, then evidence that scientists/engineers/doctors are the people using the tool the most does not invalidate the claim. It could just means that those who are in those jobs and are bad at it are also the ones using AI.
My preference is Holfood (Chocolate). Canadian company, produced in Toronto. It has a nice flavour and isn’t too filling.
Compared to other nutrition shakes I’ve tried in the past:
Implying there’s some kind of contradiction here? Why would you need to out-source your “thinking” if your job doesn’t require “thinking”?
Literally impossible. How could it produce heat without a LLM?
Aren’t hares always looking both ways?
And also having to check OS compatibility for every package you want to use.
Is this meant to answer the question, or is it just a tangential rant?
They could be conscious for all we know.
Expanding on that: until we can prove that another human being is conscious, it’s highly unlikely that we’ll be able to do so for a machine.
An example that comes to mind is mockery. People generally find mockery of behaviour/ideas that they find nonsensical to be funny. So if someone proposes that everything can be solved by a good guy with a gun, you can then mock the idea by proposing it for increasingly ridiculous scenarios.
Explanation: The person depicted in the photo has their earphones coming out of the bin. This is a visual simile comparing their friends music and the contents of said bin. A blue bin is typically used for recycling in most places. It is saying that just like recycled goods, their friends music has a quality that allows it to be loved by many, then remixed and further enjoyed.
I’d argue that both go against the spirit of the game.
The country sobered up and decided to write dates correctly, only to relapse the very next day.
You can disagree with an interpretation, but you can’t disagree that someone else interpreted a sentence the way they did. The comments and upvotes in the comments tell you very clearly how others are interpreting it.
As a +1 explicit data point, I’ll tell you right now that I also read it as the priest being the painter at first.