Not really true though. Computers are still better at math. They’re even pretty good at coding, if you count compiling high-level code into assembly as coding.
But in this case we built a language machine to respond to language with more language. Of course it’s not going to do great at other stuff.
Are there even any indigenous people in Tarzan? I haven’t read the book, but from the movie I only remember his gorilla buddy and the little elephant. I think Tarzan is more about rebelling against civilization in general, instead of colonization in specific (which James Cameron’s Avatar is). It’s very post-industrialization in that sense.
Edit: Whoops, just read the synopsis on Wikipedia. I don’t think Tarzan is the white saviour you’re looking for…
~1990-2005-ish
1990: Mega Drive, SNES, Neo Geo
1994: Sega Saturn, Playstation
1996: N64
1998: Dreamcast
2000: PS2
2001: GameCube, Xbox
2005: Xbox 360
2006: PS3, Wii
Those are all consoles normally considered retro, except for maybe that last gen. I think the era that’s missing a term is 2005-2015, but there’s actually not a whole lot happening in those years. PS4 and Xbox One? The age of cheap gaming PCs?
My Gimp workflow heavily involves Inkscape for that reason. If you need shapes, curves, text, moving stuff around, even scaling and rotating, Inkscape is much better. It’s only when I actually have to edit something in an existing image that I open Gimp. And sometimes when I need a complicated guideline, I’ll create it in Inkscape, export to png, import in Gimp, just so I don’t have to use the shape tool.
We live in a society
I think Greek mythology is well-known around the world, but not many languages pronounce the poor man’s name as uh-kill-ease.
Are there other types of percolators? I thought the recirculation and constant heating of the reservoir were required features.
I’m the old Norm. I like normalfalfa!
That’s just unfair! Unsportsmanlike! Below the belt! Stand up and fight her like a man, you coward!
I give a 4 to anime that were just barely good enough to finish. If the last episode is even sorta decent, it’s often a 6. I have given a 1 to an anime once, when it was not quite bad enough to drop after episode 1 and made a huge step down in episode 2. If I drop after 1 episode, it doesn’t even make it to my list.
It is hard by the end, but it gradually eases you into it. It also makes failure very comfortable, just spawns you right back, takes very little time at all, so there’s some levels where I just brute-forced my way through with a hundred deaths. But I did hit all necessary jumps for real and next time I was there, I did it first try. Going back to 1a after clearing 7b really felt like when a lvl 100 wizard returns to the starting area, but my in-game power didn’t change this time, it was all pure skill and it felt amazing.
You could randomize the order of the labels and it would still be true. The main difference between lewd and non-lewd isn’t the amount of clothes, but the way the clothes hug to the body. If you’re confused how a person would ever get their body into their clothes, they’re actually already naked and the artist just doesn’t want to admit it yet.
So in a way, it’s the Dark Souls armor that is the real fanservice here.
Couldn’t they just move .io to a different category? Or are TLDs never reused once they lose their original designation?
Piggyback is the most practical and she can hum a marching song in your ear.
To be honest, Ariana Grande had it properly translated, but she missed that it was also a kind of grill in Japan. She probably should have stayed away from Japanese in this case, because there’s just no great way to phrase “7 rings” without invoking the grill. I wouldn’t do it for the aesthetics of the kanji either, 七 is the ugliest one imo.
Edit: Actually, I think she could have fixed it quite cleanly. I’m no expert on Japanese, but counting is done a little differently than in English. 七輪 is very literally “seven rings”, but it actually has a very general sense “seven ring-shaped objects” and you’d normally qualify what object you’re talking about exactly. So if the meaning is supposed to be “seven rings (jewelry)”, you could write 七輪の指輪 “seven rings (general) of rings (jewelry)”. That’s an addition to the original tattoo that would eliminate the “grill” sense because now the grammatical function of the word is different.
So in programming, you’d write ‘if’ as:
not pizza or fart where the farting is irrelevant until the pizza is involved.
While ‘iff’ would be:
pizza equals fart where pizza means fart and no pizza means no fart.
I actually wrote iff as (not pizza and not fart) or (pizza and fart) before, and I’m pretty sure that’s the way I wrote an iff in production code in the past, but your comment made me realize that “they should be true at the same time” can be tested really easily with equality.
With that description I’d expected it to be the complete opposite of what it actually is. I have a colleague who’s always like “according to ChatGPT…” and I have to figure out if it lucked out this time or he just believed some bullshit again. It’s really a coin toss, but when I correct him, he’ll go right back to the coin toss machine with the new information and go “see, it corrected itself!” No, you stupid motherfucker, I corrected you and you influenced the statistical language model to spit out different words this time, but it’ll go right back to being wrong, just like you.
I can’t imagine having someone watch 3 months x 13 hours of real-time security footage is worth the 10k, unless the insurance would pay his salary.
But now I know why stores sometimes have their most expensive stuff just sitting there in full view. It’s not just for the customers’ viewing.
Greentexts are improv comedy and everyone is polite enough to play along instead of trying to argue what is clearly a made-up story for laughs
Sorry, it wasn’t as much a synopsis as it was the criticism section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarzan#Themes_of_gender_and_race
Looking at it now, I see citations for the essays, but not for the factual claims made by those essays, so I hope the editor who wrote it didn’t take their word for it.