Bad. Still is bad. Is still bad. Either order for is and still works.

Most consumers don’t buy their own routers. The only time I’ve helped people buy routers in the last decade is to get one you could install a vpn on. Looking at the wireless standards never crossed our minds.

Would dropping out have done anything? Biden got over 50% of the vote. Burnie and Warren together were only around 33%.

They don’t actually understand what you’re asking for so they aren’t going to go do the task. They’ll give whatever answer seems plausible based on what everyone else in their training data has said. So you might get a random string that looks like it could be a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros, but I’d be surprised if it actually is one.

I think we have a different understanding of ranked choice.

In your example, you have 3 candidates, and candidate 3 isn’t very popular. He isn’t many people’s first choice. At the end of round 1, candidate 1 has 45% of the first choice votes, candidate 2 has 46% of the first choice votes, and candidate 3 has 9% of the first choice votes. Candidate 3 is then eliminated, and those who voted for him have their votes go to their second choice candidate. That should leave either candidate 1 or 2 winning. The only way he wins is if he had more first choice votes than one of the other candidates.

If someone who is everyone’s second choice but no one’s first choice wins, that sounds like approval voting or something similar, not ranked choice.

Edit: Looking at the referenced election, it looks like he was the most popular among the people who didn’t want the 2 popular candidates. The first round was 8 candidates and a simple ballot. The second round was a runoff election with the 3 most popular candidates and a ranked choice ballot. He won the first round of that. No one had 50%, so instant runoff, but he also won the second round of that.

To avoid that situation, you would have had to change the run-off rules to only allow the 2 top people instead of the 3 top people. But it still was an in person run off that gave you the result you dislike.

You know the alternate name for ranked choice? Instant runoff.

In your opinion, why does making everyone come out a second time produce better results?

If everyone stopped eating meat, would there still be slaughter houses in 5 years?

The writing of the paper is generally a trivial part of the work. Each technical paper is supposed to be a succinct summary of months or years of technical work.

Ah. I hadn’t really considered preprints or workshops. If I just count the ones that seem to be published in journals or conferences, it’s 28. Still prolific. But reasonable in a 10-15 person lab.

I’m not questioning his contributions to the field. Just being on that many papers. It just seemed like such a crazy amount of publishing.

Though deep learning has been on fire the last couple years. And the list posted included a lot of preprints and workshops, which I hadn’t really considered.

That’s kind of the point I was making.

I’ve been in academia. My field required a “significant intellectual contribution” to the research and the writing, so no putting your name on papers if you just supplied space/material/budget. You can get an acknowledgement for that, not an authorship credit.

Does 80 technical papers in 2.5 years seem kind of off to anyone else? That’s more than a paper every 2 weeks. Is there really time for meaningful research if you’re publishing that often? Is he advising a lot of students? If that’s the case, is he providing the attention generally needed for each one? Is his field just super different than mine?

You got it.

That’s kind of a weird question, too. Like, what does it mean if you say no? That you are a citizen or that you don’t intend to become a permanent resident?

“Do you need a visa?” Or “Are you legally allowed to work in the United States?” would be the way it would generally be asked and isn’t a problem. See all the comments that replied to the person saying it wasn’t a big deal.

Dunno. I don’t follow football. So I can’t name any kickers. Was wondering if they’re the same, or if this guy is actually forgettable to any one who actually pays attention.

No, that leaves open the possibility that you are a UK citizen. “Do you have green card?” skips over asking if you are a citizen and goes straight to “Are you at least a permanent resident?”

Put another way, if the candidate answers “No.” to “Do you have a green card?” That doesn’t tell the recruiter if they need a visa or if they have the right to work in the US without a presumption that they aren’t a citizen.

That’s very different than automatically assuming you aren’t a citizen of the UK and asking if you have permanent residence.

Can you name other nfl kickers?

Primary to tertiary? Does that mean it includes what college students through grad school spend themselves? Because that would shift perception of this a lot.

Edit: The original data does include public funding and private funding:

Every year, governments, private companies, students and their families make decisions about the financial resources invested in education.

They do break it out, but I can’t tell if the graphic is using the total or just the public funding.

So this graphic might just be: Americans spend a stupid amount on college.