stravanasu
It seems to me these scenes are introduced in films to sexualize them. Most often than not they don’t add anything to the story. But blood & sex get more viewers. So I find the whole thing hypocritical.
Brings me to mind an episode of the hilarious series “Coupling”, where Jeff says that the actress in the film “The Piano” (?) was naked in the whole film. His friends say she wasn’t, it was only a scene in the film. And Jeff replies “it depends on how you watch it” 🤣
Nobel prize in computer science. Looks like the Nobel Prize committee has forgotten what Physics is.
For a moment I thought the “here’s how” meant “here’s how to play in mud and dirt”. Let’s do it like pros, folks!
This is a fascinating phenomenon – but fully within current theory. And there’s no “inversion of the arrow of time”, despite what the sensationalistic, misleading title seems to imply. From the recent paper (my emphasis):
Our results, over a range of pulse durations and optical depths, are consistent with the recent theoretical prediction that the mean atomic excitation time caused by a transmitted photon (as measured via the time integral of the observed phase shift) equals the group delay experienced by the light.
The theoretical explanation is given in this paper:
We examine this problem using the weak-value formalism and show that the time a transmitted photon spends as an atomic excitation is equal to the group delay, which can take on positive or negative values.
It is essentially related to the difference between phase and group velocity of waves.
One more example of how nature – as we currently understand it – offers amazing, fascinating, unexpected phenomena. It doesn’t need misleading sensationalism.
these autonomous agents represent the next step in the evolution of large language models (LLMs), seamlessly integrating into business processes to handle functions such as responding to customer inquiries, identifying sales leads, and managing inventory.
I really want to see what happens. It seems to me these “agents” are still useless in handling tasks like customer inquiries. Hopefully customers will get tired and switch to companies that employ competent humans instead…
The current security philosophy almost seems to be: “In order to make it secure, make it difficult to use”. This is why I propose to go a step further: “In order to make it secure, just don’t make it”. The safest account is the one that doesn’t exist or that can’t be accessed by anyone, including its owner.
Appreciated if someone can explain what is the problem and its context in simple terms 🙏
I understand the GNU “framework” is built on free, open source software. So I don’t understand how one can “discover” that there were pieces of non-free software there… They were put there by mistake?
It’s utter bullshit from the very start. First, it isn’t true that the Ricci curvature can be written as they do in eqn (1). Second, in eqn (2) the Einstein tensor (middle term) cannot be replaced by the Ricci tensor (right-hand term), unless the Ricci scalar (“R”) is zero, which only happens when there’s no energy. They nonchalantly do that replacement without even a hint of explanation.
Elsevier and ScienceDirect should feel ashamed. They can go f**k themselves.
