@blinry I can think of a few such as mint, Asafoetida, Garam masala to name a few. I am not sure how well the fennel and other licorice kind of things would work either.
@Sycaid I think MbP is usually done in secret. This seems to be pretty wide open and for some reason there is a doctor involved as well. I get what you are saying, I just think it is not the correct terminology.
@joseph GNU/Linux Debian 11 (Bullseye)
Because my prior was GNU/Linux 10 (Buster)
And before that was GNU/Linux (9).....
At some point there was an Ubuntu, a Lubuntu, and Kubuntu, but I am not a fan of the Cannonical commercial arm. I still put Lubuntu on old machines before I sell them.
Redhat/Fedora/CentOS and all that ilk should be my favored because they are based in my state, but I don't really care for their commercial arm, IBM.
Arch, LFS, Gentoo all felt like much more work than I cared to to in order to maintain a stable working system. Arch was fun enough to play with but everything eventually became a hassle.
OpenSUSE was okay, but just never really anything special to make me love or hate it.
If I go back far enough I remember Slackware 0.97 back in the early 90's.
Do we consider ChromeOS or Android to be versions?
Once you find one you like, stick with it. Sometimes it annoys me that not everything has a fully FOSS part available, specifically drivers and such. Or "programs" like Cinnelera, Eclipse, and so forth. But if I need specific tools I can usually figure out how to install it.
Also, once you get used to a package system like "apt" the thought of moving to a different one like pacman or whatever else is out there, just feels like unnecessary stress.
@sugar probably shouldn't be a "pair of underwear". More accurately would be pair of underpants. Pants, and pantaloons were a 2 -piece ordeal (more like socks) that you put one on each side and tied them around your waist. It was later that they became made as 1 attached to each other.
@kat I am starting to quick-cull things I don't care to see, as well as stuff I don't feel I have anything to contribute to. Life's too short to wade through stuff that you don't care for.
Okay, here is the challenge for this week.
Tennis is a cool sport to watch. Especially, if either Serena or Venus or both are playing. :) However, the scoring is really odd, because it is based on the clock face. To make it even more fun, it did come from France, so instead of Zero we refer to l'œuf or "the egg". However, as we now pronounce it , it is "love". I am certain that there can be some interesting jokes in there, but I am not going for any of them. :)
Anyway, when you begin a game both players have scored zero times so their score is said to be "love - love" or "love all". When a player has scored 1 time, they are said to have "15" as advancing around the clock face 1/4 of the way. Their second score would be called "30" since that would be 1/2 way around. Obviously, their third score should be "40" because that forces you to win by 2 :) Not sure it makes sense, but that is how it works. So as an example a game might go like this:
love - love
15 - love
30 - love
40 - love
Game - player1
Not all games work out that one player gets to run the score, so it could also go like this:
love - love
15 - love
15 - 15
15 - 30
30 - 30
30 - 40
Game - player2
However, after the 3rd point is scored if both players have 40 the score is said as
Because, France. :)
At any point when a player becomes 2 points ahead after 40 they win, and we say Game - <player name>
But after the score is tied at 40 or higher, the next point is called "advantage" so we no longer care about the underlying clock face scores, and merely go through "Deuce", "Advantage - player1" "Deuce" "Advantage - player2" "Game - player2". In theory, one could continually bounce from "Deuce" to advantage one player or the other until one of them players simply falls out or dies. Though I am not aware of that ever actually happening. There have been some pretty long games.
"Back in 1975 on May 26, at the Surrey Grass Court Championships at Surbiton, Anthony Fawcett and Keith Glass racked up a record 37 deuces in a single game for a grand total of 80 points."
But I digress. Here is your challenge if you choose to accept it.
Write a method/function that takes any legal tennis game score, such as (0, 0) or (5,3) and so on, and have it output the traditional tennis score as described above, "love - love" or "Game - player1" in my example of legal scores. Keep in mind, (12, 2) is not a legal score, as once the first player achieved 4 he would have already won. You don't need to test for this, but be aware it is not a scenario you should have to deal with. You can represent any tie up to 2 simply as 'love - love' or '15 - 15' or '30 - 30' but starting at 3 you would not say '40 - 40' but rather "Deuce" at that level and any higher. If you would like to do so, as a bonus you could represent the simple ties less than 3:3 (Deuce) with the 'all' so 'love all', '15 all', or '30 all' would be a bonus representation, but '40 all' would be incorrect, as it should merely be 'Deuce'.
Use whatever language or methods you like. I am using Java. I will also have unit tests. You are free not to use them, but I am not interested in testing anyone's code for accuracy, so if you don't provide them, the best you can hope for is "Nice job. Good effort. I guess." At least from me :)
Try to focus on good quality code. Also focus on reduction of complexity, DRY, and certainly use subroutines as necessary.
I will probably be checking mine in to my GitHub or GitLab repo at some point later in the week.
@ironfroggy We just looked at a car on a lot. When we got to the table to discuss it they had added 3500 dollars to the sticker price from the window. When asked about this they said it was their "market adjustment" because it was getting harder for them to get inventory and such. I asked why that was my problem, or why I would even want to carry that on my back. After all, this wasn't my business, it was theirs. Let them take the hit, and reduction in profit, was my attitude. Maybe I am just a bad person. But suffice it to say, we didn't buy a new car that day, even though I had recently come in to a good chunk of "extra." We had no problem finding other things to spend it on :)
@tindall language is a funny thing. People sometimes choose their wording because they think one things "sounds" or makes then "sound" more intelligent using it. However, people simply hear things used a certain way enough times, and it takes on that meaning for them and they don't distinguish it from the original meaning.
I have some huge pet peeves on language, and will make corrections when I am bothered deeply enough. One that annoys me is "That begs the question". I have heard it used incorrectly so often, even by news persons and others that should be versed in the language they are using there comes a point where I just have to shake my head and let it go, or continue to yell at the TV or radio. "Decimate" when one means annihilate is yet another. "Unique" with comparative adverbs such as "very" remind me of the young child having multiple "Best" friends.
You can try to correct a person's speech usage, but at some point you lose as the language grows to encompass their usage relegating the original meaning to "Obscure".
I challenge you to look up the etymology of the word "nice". See if you still feel the same way.
@p so, if I am reading this correctly, it appears to suggest that a 10 y/o girl is equally attractive as 38 y/o and an 11 to a 29 y/o?
It would arguably be difficult to differentiate a 10 or 11 y/o girl from a 10/11 y/o boy at that point in development absent some precocious development.
I would put their testing methods and conclusions on the same level as the people trying to cure "gays". I would say both the study and resultant chart are dubious at best.
However, if it is being used in some X-Wave feminist anti-male propaganda, then since it fits the preconceived notion of all PiV sex is rape, and all men are <insert your crime here>. Then it is a perfect chart. Because it supports the argument. And isn't that what is most important? Finding something to support an argument, rather than something that might change your mind?
In addition, they are taking a sampling of 80 men. Well, presumably these 80 men are of varying ages. Sexual attractiveness to a man as he progresses through his life stages changes. Although we show it in movies, most 10 year old boys have no sexual interest in mature women with Rubinesque proportions, but rather are starting to notice the subtle changes in the girls in their peer age group. And even the possibility or catching a glimpse of something forbidden, or at least normally hidden. As he ages so do the aspects that catch his attention. This should progress, but also, social pressures, opportunity, and probably the media a person consumes will further mold and "template" what he finds attractive. Certainly just looking at the difference in interest in tiny bottoms of the 1960's and much larger more pronounced ones of today comes from somewhere. How much is it internal natural cues for a healthy partner to pass on genetics? One would think the waif would never present with such cues, as such she would be considered weak,sickly, malnourished, and in natural choosing, not a good potential with which to pass on genetics. But at a point that was all the rage. Where does that image of sexual attractiveness come from?
@p The chart is pretty bogus given the labels alone. Is there a definition of "sexually attractive"? Does it account for "nubility" by which I mean a girl appearing to be of fertile development maturity, regardless of her chronological age? There is a beauty and attractiveness in "youth" in general. Many of the things mature women do or at least the marketing suggests they do, clearly has the goal or appearing younger than they actually are. One might even consider the current trend in pubic hair styles, or even overall weightloss to be with the intent of looking "younger". Some of the "Asian" fetishes tend to focus on the more slight, less curvy sub-nubile or pre-pubescent appearance. Though the androgynous focus a while back, was focused not only towards a unisex but also for the more slight. The occasional bear in a dress with a full beard being an obvious exception.
It might be a better study to focus on the origins of pedophiles' templating or impressioning as it were. Are their still somewhat stuck in their 12 year old brain getting that same feeling from seeing a 12 year old girl? I assume that at 40 a man does't see a 12 year old girl with the same reaction he did when he was 12. I think it would be too simple to say it is just that. Like many situations with sex power is involved. Perhaps the power one feels over someone is directly proportional to the weakness they perceive in that person's appearance. These are just guesses, thinking aloud.
In theory, we should be reacting to natural cues to further the species. Nubility/fertility specifically the recognition of which, would be key to the survival of such a species. One may argue towards the precocious pubescence perhaps brought on by either hormones in our food supply or possibly by the easily available high caloric foods leading to childhood obesity and potentially increasing the rate at which girls may reach a body fat percentage that would increase estrogen earlier than one would have in years past. This in itself is taking things outside the idea of pedophile stimulus, as defined naturally of the interest in those below a nubile/fertile development, and into a legal realm of chronological age.
As to whether or not a man can suppress his arousal or not, one might argue that it may be more important that he can control his reaction to such arousal. Traci Lords was legally a minor when she made movies and posed for nudes in Penthouse magazine. Legally, all that work became "child pornography" only after it was revealed that she was underage when it was made. However, any man looking at her image would recognize her as an "adult woman" because that is what she looked like with all the cues of such. Contrast that with the nudes Brooke Shields had in Playboy when she was 10 which I doubt could be confused with an adult woman in any way.
Here should be a simple one. It was fun to do in Java and with chained calls it turns out to be somewhat of a one-liner. This is not a code-golf thing, but feel free to try it that way if that is your interest.
Let's process an integer. The idea is that if the number contains odd digits they need to be converted to their squared value. Even digits are passed through unchanged.
For example, given the number 232, you would output 292. Or in the case of 99, you would output 8181. But if it were 22 then the output would be 22.
If this is too simple and you would like a bit more of a challenge see if you can try a couple bonus situations.
1*. determine if a number is already in this state. For example 232 wouldn't be because 3 is not squared. However, 212 could be, as could 2814 since that could have come from 294.
2*. given a number possibly in this state already, decode it back to the original number.
Since 1 squared is 1 and some squares have even digits like 81 such a number could have started out as '9' or actually '81'. So in 1 and 2 you may want to come up with multiple initial beginnings. So given such '81' the answer would be both of those '81' and '9'.
Things in my life have changed. I am now in a much larger focus on Java. I am still a huge fan of TDD and Test First, but I guess that is a religious thing so I will try to contain my zeal.
Initially the challenges were intended as small problems that should be in the 1-3 hour at most. As well, I focused towards Python and the problems I was using to learn the particular concepts I was working on at the time. Since my shift to Java I am less interested in some of the finer concepts and more interested in general issues. So even though I might find a solution that uses a whole pile of chained references interesting, its solution in some other language may not be nearly as interesting to you :)
I will try to be better about posting more often. Unless I find people aren't interested, in which case I won't waste the bandwidth :)
QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.
An inclusive free speech instance.
All cultures and opinions welcome.
Explicit hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.