you can change the relative size of things with zoom

I think it’s more that a lot of people only think of badly done makeup and see well done makeup as natural beauty, which it enhances rather than contrasting with

Of course someone with clown-face-adjacent levels of makeup is going to look worse, but if done to make the skin look natural but smoother, eyes look natural but bigger and features natural but better defined then yes, I think very few people will find that less attractive

The UK’s average energy price is high, but it’s also very variable as when it’s cloudy and calm 20% of demand needs to be imported from France/Norway so wholesale energy is very expensive, but when it’s sunny and windy wholesale energy is free or even at negative cost and 20% of generation gets exported to France/Norway, where their energy is more expensive

If you have the option to run datacentres at minimal or even negative energy cost maybe 20% of the time, then shift load elsewhere the rest of the time, then that may be a reasonable proposition

These are all in cargo pants but default is phone front left; small wallet (leather card holder with a zip pocket with a tile in it) front right; keys back zip pocket, but recently I was in another country and did water bottle front top left; phone, large wallet due to cash & book front top left; travelcard and hotel key back zip pocket, passport & 120Ah portable charger front bottom right, coins front bottom right which surprisingly felt just fine so maybe I’m ready to become a suburban dad

And yet (at least from an outsider perspective) libertarians are closer to democrats than republicans

Republicans seem all about telling you what you can and can’t do (can’t get hrt, can’t get an abortion, can’t smoke weed, must marry and have children etc.) whereas both democrats and libertarians are largely “just live your life” but that could just be because all the american parties seem so financially right wing that they’re basically the same in that respect

The main issue is more funding won’t help; all it does is patch things up, and the root causes of the issues never get solved.

With reform, you could remove bureaucracy where it causes issues and add it where there’s breakdowns in communications instead of just adding more funding to improve capacity in one obvious area and expose a bottleneck immediately before or after it, making the majority of the extra funding wasted

pure water at mean atmosphere pressure at sea level if we’re getting technical, but frankly human body temperature varies from 35.5C (95.9F) to 37.5C (99.5F) anyway, and that’s before considering when people are ill, so if we go down that route it falls apart quickly enough that the definition of 100 given above is clearly just as arbitrary

How is 0F 100% cold though, most places will never get that cold, so it surely makes more sense to have 0F at freezing point of water and 100F at 38C?

Are they identical objects?

I mean they could go underwater and just come up to breathe and eat dead ants

Storage forensics can look into variations in charge to suggest “this used to be a 1” or “this used to be a 0”

To store more data that way, it’d have to be analog data in reality, as otherwise data loss due to charge decay would be immense so you’d need so much error checking you’d lose most of the storage savings

If you trust your wiring skills you could theoretically just alter it to have a low-amp constant power source then higher-amp power source by adding the signals when the sensor trips… I think the issue is a lot to do with the fact LEDs are way less dimmable than older lights though, as dimmer switches cut off parts to the waveform so have lower rms voltage and flicker, whereas you’d want to supply the same voltage, just fewer amps… if you’re keeping it constant I think it’s very possible?

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/218976/ac-constant-current-source-design - this in parallel with the motion activated circuit?

As someone who works in advertising, that is partially true, but also not the complete story…

Data brokers want you to believe that the more data you have the more likely your ads are to be successful, but in reality it’s not about the amount of data but the quality of the data. If you have someone who has looked at reviews of gym shoes/different models on different stores, then that data is pretty valuable as you can focus on getting them to buy from your store or try and advertise models at the top of their budget, which will likely lead to a higher ROI than just advertising on fitness forums (note it is super hard to get the balance between tipping people over the line to buy and advertising them something they were already going to buy/had already decided against - Google particularly are absolutely terrible at this, but also do evaluation in house, so they’ll misrepresent to advertisers that your ad which showed up one link above your non-sponsored link made 100% of the difference in getting the purchase). Similarly, if you have data that someone is active on a car audio forum and recently bought a specific model of car, you can advertise kits/speakers specifically to that car, which is better than just advertising “hey, we make audio upgrade kits for [specific car/cars in general] on a forum/related site”.

This also makes advertising one of the few situations where using ML actually makes sense - there’s huge amounts of data (way more than a person can consider) to come in, and patterns which lead to good results (someone purchasing something) or bad results (someone not purchasing something). It’s not worth a human targeting every single microcategory, but if an ML model can pick up that advertising to (eg) people who have recently purchased cameras who are interested in triathlons and often visit areas with with high rainfall makes them more likely to buy your specific aftermarket lens hood, then it makes buying the ads so much more worth it and also lets you extrapolate onto other microcategories which may also have similar results, and if they don’t then that updates the model.

Generally data is less useful for awareness campaigns (ie “next time you’re in the supermarket/in the business for x, buy our brand” type of campaign), especially if it’s already on a relevant site, but it’s still somewhat useful if someone is reading on a (trustworthy) news site or watching an ad-supported streaming service, however purchase data & activity data is still useful for showing more relevant ads, as while 90%+ of people on a fitness forum are going to be into fitness, I don’t think 90%+ of general site visitors or tv show viewers are going to be into anything specific enough to make it worth it to advertise it.

The reason they have to manipulate the audience is because people look for validation and so feel good when other people react to things in the same way as them. If another equally funny show has a laugh track and you don’t, yours will likely be less enjoyable to watch unless it’s a specific form of humour which benefits from not having a laugh track.

Basically a laugh track can’t save a terrible show, but it can manipulate people into finding a mediocre show more enjoyable to watch, but a mediocre show will make people laugh organically at least a few times anyway.

It’s pretty common in Northern English and I think maybe also Australian:

https://www.journal-labphon.org/article/id/6239/

The fact it’s not only possible but regularly used when the expectation is that it’d be hard to do without choking is why it’s such a weird word

Absolutely, it’s just English is very weird

it’s very rare in any language, complexity at the start is not uncommon, but complexity at the end is, also the ordering of the consonant types and the fact there’s two fricatives in a row at the end, it’s not just a word that not only has no place existing, but also one that should be so unstable it’d change to something less complex in decades at most, yet it’s stayed pretty consistent for a while

It’s also actually 4 consonants as there’s an unwritten k in many accents, or ng is pronounced as ŋg in others, so stɹɛŋ(k|g|∅)θs

strengths

it breaks so many linguistic rules yet feels just fine to say

I think there’s a large fanbase because of the intersection of people who grew up with them and the people who were too young to see them live but wished that they could, so yes, people probably do care to an extent, but it’s more accurate that people will be interested to hear it so they can try and get tickets

I can’t really think of a band that reasonably could get back together which would have a larger pull except for maybe One Direction, but even that’s a push when considering the number of people who could be interested in getting tickets

If it’s everything you do, then no, I struggle a lot with work ethic/just being a lazy pos but even then I do have some things I enjoy and am willing to work for… I think finding more things I enjoy (cycling, dnd & programming mainly) has helped a lot with that, so I feel like just trying new things and being willing to “give up” on them fast if you don’t like them may be good?