It's 14,000 to 75,000, not millions.
Microplastics are in the range of one micrometer to five millimeters, not nanometers.
It's 14,000 to 75,000, not millions.
Microplastics are in the range of one micrometer to five millimeters, not nanometers.
That seems more like your problem than OP's.
I want it to be consistent dammit!
YES.
In tech terms, "intelligent" or "smart" usually means inconsistent and unpredictable. It means I need to do extra work to verify that the computer didn't "helpfully" do something I never told it to do.
I understand autocorrect on phones, because phone keyboards suck very hard. I am still shocked that both Apple and Microsoft have decided to enable it by default on desktops and laptops with full keyboards. No, Apple, believe it or not, the username field in web sites is not supposed to have a capitalized first letter. If I wanted that, I have three whole keys on my keyboard that I could have used to do that. STFU and let me do my own typing. (Why usernames are case-sensitive in certain places is a whole other matter, one that's far outside my control.)
I don't use this feature much so I can't speak to the details, but yes, it does support OPDS.
Screenshot:
English Dictionary Offline: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=livio.pack.lang.en_US . Still unbloated after all these years.
Librera (ebook reader): https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.foobnix.pro.pdf.reader/ . The pro version is free on f-droid, or you can buy it on Google Play if you want to support the dev.
Fossify Gallery: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.fossify.gallery/ . This is a fork of the old Simple Gallery from before it got bought out. Same deal with Fossify File Manager and the other Fossify apps. Just no-nonsense functional apps.
If anything, it demonstrates that the law has mathematical validity. Fact-checking simply requires more work than making shit up. Even when AI gets to the point where it can do research and fact-check things effectively (which is bound to happen eventually), it'll still be able to produce bullshit in a fraction of that time, and use that research ability to create more convincing bullshit.
Fact-checking requires rigor. Bullshit does not. There's no magic way to close that gap.
However, most social media sites already implement rate limits on user submissions, so it might actually be possible to fact-check people's posts faster than they are allowed to make them.
Have you used Facebook in the last 5 years?
The UX is godawful. More than half my feed is just random crap suggestions and ads.
Haven't heard of Hiren's BootCD in like 15 years. Good to see it's still around!
Totally agree. Their product line was an absolute mess back then. Their current lineup is getting a little bloated too. I don't know why they bother having two laptop product lines anymore when they are so similar.
Being factually incorrect about literally everything you said changes nothing? Okay.
More importantly, humans are capable of abstract thought. Your whole argument is specious. If you find yourself lacking the context to understand these numbers, you can easily seek context. A good starting place would be the actual paper, which is linked in OP's article. For the lazy: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-61146-4