NaN

Instead of destroying the universe, can we destroy prior, failed shuffle/check iterations to retain o(1)? Then we wouldn’t have to reload all of creation into RAM.

Reminds me of the Reboot hotel offices.

As a longtime Plex user, I also hate their lack of focus and tendancy to priorotize bad features (like paid streaming and VR). But this one feels more like a way to re-focus on video by removing photo code from the main (video) app’s codebase, making it easier to maintain.

It was branded Rockman EXE in Japan, and NT Warrior (i.e. Net Warrior) in the US anime, only. The “network” refers to the internet and the internet of things heavily featured in the games, in which you battle viruses; hence “Battle Network.”

A lot of my feelings got summed up here: basically, the episode had a lot of momentum and incoherence. Beyond that,

• Having just watched “Pyramids of Mars,” I’m puzzled Davis revived this villain, and that the impatient Sutekh acquired the patience to wait centuries (millennia?) to complete his plan.
• I love the Memory TARDIS!
• I thought 15 was supposed to be the “healed” doctor.
• Davies is playing with the idea of concepts, perception, memory and faith influencing reality; but the handwavy, cursory explanations for how it all works makes it impossible to anticipate events or solutions to the challenges thr Doctor faces, which limits how the viewer can interact with the story and how engaged I feel. (E.g. when the Doctor says “there’s nothing I can do” we just have to take him at his word, until it turns out all he had to do was leash Sutekh and drag him into the time vortex, and likely could have from the very start, given how Sutekh was restraining himself even before they discovered Ruby’s mother. So the show becomes less of a thought exercise, more of waiting for the Doctor and plot to strikefamiliar chords.)
• This isn’t Davies’ best work, but I’m hoping he’s getting back into his groove. Either way, I’m hyped for Moffat’s upcoming special!

3 sticks of RAM…

I loved my course on patterns. It was tough, but I now regularly feel like I can apply mastery of this tricky subject to my software projects. The course used a variety of techniques:

• Read the seminal Design Patterns book by Gamma et al., for an overview of the concepts.
• Every week, we’d incorporate three patterns into a preexisting XML processor project. My final one had like 25 patterns, which was challenging to keep working amidst refactoring. (You don’t have to do them cumulatively, but I enjoyed it.)
• We’d have to ask pattern-specific questions of our classmates in forum threads; and occasionally we’d be assigned to answer some.
• We each wrote up our own pattern. (I designed one based on my experiences handling data exchange between web apps and clients.)

Together, this taught us

• How the patterns could concretely look in practice.
• Pros, cons, and other considerations for each.
• Similaraties, differences, and nuances. (We’d joke that everything was the Template pattern if you squinted.)
• The impact of modifications to the patterns.
• How to recognize, create, hone, collaborate on, and share patterns.

I appreciate this approach because patterns are an inherently fuzzy subject.

It’s more like languages evolved to incorporate the most common idioms and patterns of their ancestors. ASM abstracted common binary sequences. C abstracted common ASM control structures and call stacks. Java leaned hard on object orientation to enable compositional and inheritence-based patterns widely used in C and early OO languages. Python baselines a lot of those patterns, and makes things like the Null Object pattern unnecessary.

Don’t bee that way!

The implication of “leave a review!” is they want info on quality to improve service; the twist is they don’t care about that, just getting information about you for ad targeting.

A cluster duck, if you will.

Can we call communities “lemlets?”