It's two jokes. Firstly, "Barbarian" was a ancient Greek-"invented" term for people who don't speak Greek (or heavy dialects of Greek). The generally accepted theory is that "Barbar" is them imitating sounds they don't understand, similar to a modern "blabla". Secondly, Hercules is the Roman name for the Greek Heracles.

Sure. You have to solve it from inside out:

• not()....See comment below for this one, I was tricked is a base function that negates what's inside (turning True to False and vice versa) giving it no parameter returns "True" (because no parameter counts as False)
• str(x) turns x into a string, in this case it turns the boolean True into the text string 'True'
• min(x) returns the minimal element of an iterable. In this case the character 'T' because capital letters come before non-capital letters, otherwise it would return 'e' (I'm not entirely sure if it uses unicode, ascii or something else to compare characters, but usually capitals have a lower value than non-capitals and otherwise in alphabetical order ascending)
• ord(x) returns the unicode number of x, in this case turning 'T' into the integer 84
• range(x) creates an iterable from 0 to x (non-inclusive), in this case you can think of it as the list [0, 1, 2, ....82, 83] (it's technically an object of type range but details...)
• sum(x) sums up all elements of a list, summing all numbers between 0 and 84 (non-inclusive) is 3486
• chr(x) is the inverse of ord(x) and returns the character at position x, which, you guessed it, is 'ඞ' at position 3486.

The huge coincidental part is that ඞ lies at a position that can be reached by a cumulative sum of integers between 0 and a given integer. From there on it's only a question of finding a way to feed that integer into chr(sum(range(x)))

His Hyprland setup looks cool if you’re into that sorta thing but it’s just not what users just switching to mint, fedora, whatever might be looking for.

I would not underestimate how much of a draw "it looks cool" can have on people who are not tech savy at all. If you think about what drives new phone purchases, their major version upgrades always include lots of things that are nothing but eye-candy and those are often heavily featured in their promotion material.

If the goal is to get casual users to convert to Linux, I would argue that aesthetics is a lot more important than ANY talk about technical details, privacy, etc. If those users cared about those things, they would've switched already.

Now my bigger worry is that those users will bounce off before they manage to get their setup to look as (subjectively) cool as his.

I don't know too much about Minecraft and especially not Sky Block. But isn't the implication also that they wasted their Lava by turning it into an Obsidian instead of using water+lava to create a cobble stone generator, thus softlocking their progress entirely?

Source

It didn't play the animation for me (only the comments made me realize it was meant to be animated).

Him just standing there NOT dancing made this so much more funny and relatable to me.

People mention Spore because the official FAQ mentions Spore.

Thrive is never gonna be “from puddle to space adventures”-type of game.

People also mention Spore because this is exactly what the devs are envisioning. To quote the FAQ:

Gameplay is split into seven stages – Microbe, Multicellular, Aware, Awakening, Society, Industrial and Space.

I think it's much more likely whatever scraping they used to get the training data snatched a screenshot of the movie some random internet user posted somewhere. (To confirm, I typed "joaquin phoenix joker" into Google and this very image was very high up in the image results) And of course not only this one but many many more too.

Now I'm not saying scraping copyrighted material is morally right either, but I'd doubt they'd just feed an entire movie frame by frame (or randomly spaced screenshots from throughout a movie), especially because it would make generating good labels for each frame very difficult.

Or into a horse.

From what I remember and what a quick search on the internet confirmed, B didn't actually deny her anything. He actually went out of his way to do as much good for her as he could. He claims to have replied "Language." because he knew other people at NASA with more say on her job would find her, which would get her into trouble (and they did find her even before his first Tweet).

In addition to what other people already said, without looking at the actual percentages, this could also just be random fluctuation.
Mostly Positive is 70-79%, Mixed is 40-69%. If a game teeters around the 70% mark, it can easily cross the threshold separating the two due to pure chance, in either direction.

Scarlet and Violet sold 10 million copies during the launch weekend, so I think they'll be pretty content to keep churning out mediocre games at a much faster pace.

Even funnier: This news article is so well written/edited, that the headline doesn't even state that he ignored the flaws; It clearly states that he ignored the sub itself. Truly the pinnacle of journalism.

There's even a word for that called scurryfunging.

This is also sorta how RAW works (in DnD 5e), to quote the PHB:

Group Checks
When a number of individuals are trying to accomplish something as a group, the DM might ask for a group ability check. In such a situation, the characters who are skilled at a particular task help cover those who aren't.
To make a group ability check, everyone in the group makes the ability check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds. Otherwise, the group fails.

Taking the median roughly has the same effect, it only has a chance to differ if the number of successes and the number of failures are tied.

The “5 seconds after they started moving” is relevant. If we assume this takes place on Earth (i.e. on the surface of a sphere with a set pair of north/south poles), the angle between the two vectors changes depending on their current position.

If it's not on the equator, it's also slightly up to interpretation if "Due East" means they'll turn to stay on the same latitude, always adjusting to stay moving east forever or if they'll do a great circle. In the former case, the north moving one will eventually get stuck at the north-pole too instead of continuing their circle around the globe. Most likely not within 5 seconds though, unless the place they started was within 25 feet of the north-pole.

To actually do the math we'll need to know (or somehow deduce) where "the place where everything about them began" is though.

I've seen this reposted on the original 196 on Reddit multiple times so saying this is the worst 196 on the basis of this meme being posted makes no sense.

Also nazis are very unlikely to be participating in this community anyway, and if they are then they are either hiding to the point of indistinguishably or getting the ban-hammer really quickly. In the latter case, the problem is solved by the mods and in the former case, with the internet's anonymity, someone fully to be a member of a digital community is just a regular member of the community.

Tankies on the other hand share many more values with the core demographic of this community so they might be less inclined to fully hide their views and their views simmering through might not immediately get them a ban (depending on what they let shine through, of course).

The reason they chose Antarctica is because the most often used flat earth model* has Antarctica as a ring on the "rim".

They usually do acknowledge a 24h sun in the north existing based on that model because it would require the sun to remain central over the disc, which is geometrically not really an issue. However the southern 24h sun is not possible with that model. (Edit: Excluding some weird lensing effects or multiple suns, like some of them claim)

*Most of them will tell you they don't have a model, because they don't really know what "model" means.

Source: I watched too many SciManDan videos.

I disagree. The placeholder should be 0 (or even better, a negative number if the system allows it).

Otherwise you'll have people who will end up paying the $1000, believing it to be what they owe.

In a strange way, having it be ridiculously high was a benefit since it got this person to complain. If it was something high but still within in the range of plausibility, he might have overpaid. That being said, it being ridiculously high could also (as the article suggests) be used nefariously to scare people into showing up in court.

On the second part. That is only half true. Yes, there are LLMs out there that search the internet and summarize and reference some websites they find.

However, it is not rare that they add their own "info" to it, even though it's not in the given source at all. If you use it to get sources and then read those instead, sure. But the output of the LLM itself should still be taken with a HUGE grain of salt and not be relied on at all if it's critical, even if it puts a nice citation.