michaelmrose

They could have easily used base 2 which is actually connected to how the hardware works and just called it something else

Getting Ukrainian troops defending their homes killed in order to ensure that the rapists and murderers invading their homes don't suffer is a moral abomination.

gang raping American POWs didn't protect anyone. Actively killing the people who are currently trying to murder you with fire isn't meaningfully morally distinct than killing them with bullets.

The reason to avoid incendiary weapons near civilians is the heavy collateral damage to said civilians. It's no more illegal to burn enemy soldiers than fill their torsos full of shrapnel nor their bellies full of lead nor any of the other horrible things we do to enemy soldiers.

It's not illegal why should it be?

You literally get a pass because its not illegal to set an enemy on fire any more than its illegal to blow a hole in their guts with a bullet or fill their torso full of shrapnel. I'm not sure why you think it would be.

Why is it even morally reprehensible? If you you blow the guts out and faces off Russian soldiers by more traditional means they are just as dead and if dozens of Ukrainians die in the course of digging the Russians out of cover do you account that a superior outcome? If so how?

If a burglar strode into your home with a gun and you believed that conflict was inevitable how much risk and or suffering would you tolerate from your wife and children in order to decrease the chance of harm or suffering by the burglar? Would you accept a 3% chance of a dead kid in order to harm instead of kill the burglar? Would you take a 1% in order to decrease his suffering substantially?

My accounting is that there is no amount of risk or harm I would accept for me and mine to preserve the burglar's life because he made his choice when he chose to harm me and mine. I wouldn't risk a broken finger to preserve his entire life nor should I. That said should he surrender I would turn him over to the police. I should never take opportunity to hurt him let alone execute him. Should I do this I would be the villain no matter what had transpired before because I would be doing so out of emotional reaction I wouldn't be acting any longer to preserve me or mine.

We should expect Ukrainians to take any possible advantage for in doing so they preserve innocent life. Preserving the lifes or preventing the suffering of active enemies presently actively trying to do harm is nonsensical.

There is no reason whatsoever to use base 16 for computer storage it is both unconnected to technology and common usage it is worse than either base 2 or 10

Actually if you read the article ChatGPT is horrible at math a modified version where chatGPT was fed the correct answers with the problem didn't make the kids stupider but it didn't make them any better either because they mostly just asked it for the answers.

TLDR: ChatGPT is terrible at math and most students just ask it the answer. Giving students the ability to ask something that doesn't know math the answer makes them less capable. An enhanced chatBOT which was pre-fed with questions and correct answers didn't screw up the learning process in the same fashion but also didn't help them perform any better on the test because again they just asked it to spoon feed them the answer.

At least 44% are liable to vote for a literal hitler figure. At least 1-2% will vote a protest vote instead of voting against a fascist who would plunge America into darkness for a generation. Pretty sad for our educational system.

She can effect the outcome of the election even if she can't win it this should be obvious.

TLDR: It was an event for Russia Today an effective arm of the Russian government which was very supportive of Steins candidacy because of her potential as a spoiler and Putin only gave a speech to the group didn't strategize with her personally (at that juncture).

How is this less damning