deleted by creator

It’s a gif with audio.

Edit: I was completely wrong about this. It’s an MP4. My bad!

Sure, but what does that have to do with this picture? The bridge looks deteriorated on that leading edge because 75 trucks have crashed into it at speed.

Or counting has gotten better

8+8=16 is absolutely S tier

The relative number here might be more useful as long as it’s understood that Google already has significant emissions. It’s also sufficient to convey that they’re headed in the wrong direction relative to their goal of net zero. A number like 14.3 million tCO₂e isn’t as clear IMO.

I do, friend. I do.

Yes. Effectively you will not have any credit history, so you simply won’t qualify for lower interest credit products or will be rejected on applications that have a credit score threshold.

That’s awesome - nice work!

Sure, I agree.

Unfortunately, no such solution currently exists or has been widely adopted.

I use an app called Recipe Keeper. It’s amazing because I just share the page to the app, it extracts the recipe without any nonsense, and now I have a copy for later if I want to reuse it. I literally never bother scrolling recipe pages because of how terrible they all are, and I decide in the app if the recipe is one I want to keep.

It also bypasses paywalls and registration requirements for many sites because the recipe data is still on the page for crawlers even if it’s not rendered for a normal visitor.

You’re in the wrong Rochester!

Really interesting! I wonder what would happen if you combine these two properties. Suppose some length of the middle is all walls, and the hooks are infill, or vice versa. Is there an optimal mix that maximizes the weight it can support in your testing, or have you found the optimal configuration (with infill along the entire length) already?

You’re famous for being photographed shirtless on a horse. Is that because horses can’t judge you, or is it a new Russian policy for reducing laundry costs?

Can someone provide some context here? Why is he screaming at a coach?

Also side note: why is that even vaguely tolerable behavior for a professional sports player / role model?

0.1mm seems awfully thin for a double edged blade.

It’s also unreasonable to assume they will stack anywhere close to perfectly.

My guess is you’re off by at least a factor of 20.

I was thinking the same, but then realized it’s probably just quiche.

once the two sets have reached their value

will weigh 100 times less

there should be the same number bills in the sets

The short answer is that none of these statements apply the way you think to infinite sets.

I disagree. You should have validation at each layer, as it’s easier to handle bad inputs and errors the earlier they are caught.

It’s especially important in this case with email because often one or more of the following comes into play when you’re dealing with an email input:

• You’re doing more than sending an email (for ex, creating a record for a new user).
• The UI isn’t waiting for you to send that email (for ex, it’s handled through a queue or some other background process).
• The API call to send an email has a cost (both time and money).
• You have multiple email recipients (better hope that external API error tells you which one failed).

I’m not suggesting that validation of an email should attempt to be exhaustive, but a well thought-out implementation validates all user inputs. Even the underlying API in this example is validating the email you give it before trying to send an email through its own underlying API.

Passing obvious garbage inputs down is just bad practice.

Yes, but no. Pretty much every application that accepts an email address on a form is going to turn around and make an API call to send that email. Guess what that API is going to do when you send it a string for a recipient address without an @ sign? It’s going to refuse it with an error.

Therefore the correct amount of validation is that which satisfies whatever format the underlying API requires.

For example, AWS SES requires addresses in the form UserName@[SubDomain.]Domain.TopLevelDomain along with other caveats. If the application is using SES to send emails, I’m not going to allow an input that doesn’t meet those requirements.