That might have been a reference to a very old Slashdot meme, ca. 2002. Sometimes those words were combined; there was a movie with the words + “from outer space”; and there was a trolling group GNAA.

Now, is that what they were going for? Only you can answer that. It’s a pretty deep cut into a pretty nerdy corner of the Internet.

You are comparing it to a hash, following some extra rules on what the data could be. You have exactly the length of hash before you can reliably count on duplicates (and collisions happen much sooner). In torrent v1, this is SHA-1, which has a 160-bit (or 20 byte) hash. Which means for every single additional random bit, you have doubled the number of possible matches.

If your torrent has an uncommonly small chunk size of 256KiB, that’s 261,144 bytes. Minus the 20 from above, and you have a likely 256^261124 chunks that match your hash. That’s a number so large that Google calls it infinity. It would take you forever just to generate these chunks by brute force, since each would need to be created, then hashed, then the results stored somewhere. Many years ago, I remember someone doing this on CRC32 (32 bits/4 bytes) and 6 byte files. It took all night, and produced dozens of hash-matching files. You’re talking many orders of magnitude bigger.

But then what? You’d still need to apply the other rules on what the data could be. Rules that are probably more CPU-intensive than the hash algorithm.

The one trick that AI might be able to use to save the day is that it may contain in its corpus the original file. In effect, that would make the AI an unlikely seeder.

FTFA:

A few years and one pandemic later, the company filed for bankruptcy on Monday,

It’s also in a bunch of comments already

You’re absolutely right. Such procedures should be treated the same, as much as is appropriate. (vasectomies are a much more minor procedure, so things like recovery support would be different)

If their beliefs get in the way, they need to find another profession. This is pretty well established across the entire industry.

You must provide the same level of care for a pregnant teen, a smoker dying of lung cancer, or a neo Nazi. It doesn’t matter how their lifestyle offends you.

You seem to have misinterpreted my posts. Informed decisions are ok, but someone else making that decision is not. It’s not sexist, because it works exactly the same if the roles are reversed.

Counterpoint: birthdays (and cake days, and many anniversaries) are a pointless celebration.

Payton Oswalt had a pretty good plan on that: https://youtu.be/sbJs-Ul1QFo

How so? If I were considering a vasectomy, I would expect to be told that it may be an issue for my future wife. I would take issue if I were told that such a decision should be left to her, and not mine to make.

The headline kinda buries the lede. From the article, “(the) gynecologist told her the choice should be up to her future husband”.

A discussion about potential regrets is a lot more benign than denying her autonomy.

To add to this, imagine the reverse. Can you imagine if they passed up better opportunities, just so that it could happen on a specific date on the calendar?

Sounds absurd, right?

“handle” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. The signs are already there that all of these edge cases will just be programmed as “safely pull over and stop until conditions change or a human takes control”. Which isn’t a small task in itself, but it’s a lot easier than figuring out to continue (e.g.) on ice.

I’m going to take a wild guess that this is also pretty close to the population share.

I’m pretty sure they mean the Russian Reversal jokes, usually attributed to Yakov Smirnoff https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Soviet_Russia

I think you’re approaching the wrong aspect. While that could be a scam where a man is impersonating a woman, there are plenty where it’s actually a woman running the scam. There are plenty of red flags here, and those don’t change.

The problem is that I’m sure your friend is aware of those red flags. He’s also choosing to ignore them. I suspect he doesn’t do well with women IRL, and this at least gives him hope.

Assuming that’s all true, this is way above the pay grade of random people on the Internet.

The only reason I could believe it, is that it’s happened before. See: Reagan and the Iran hostages.

Still, I’m going to need a better source. This seems uncharacteristically competent.

Republicans have already blamed (credited?) Taylor Swift for election losses, simply because she told people to vote. Not for telling people vote for/against any particular issue, candidate, or office. Just to go vote.

She has immense power, but that power may not be easy to control.

He’s even stated as much, just not recently. It was about his tax cuts for the rich, and how she would have to love him for all the money he sent her way.

It makes sense, given that he’s never known a love that he hasn’t had to pay for.

Economies of scale affects the costs to the manufacturer. Competition/demand affect the price to the consumer.

There are many reasons to vote for one party over another. Money/taxes is one of them. Another is women’s rights, which is a pretty big thing both for her and her fan base.

But your main point is valid. By remaining silent, her fans (and others) can project their own beliefs on her.

There’s a problem with your premise. NATO (much like the UN) is not a military force of its own. Rather, it’s an agreement between many nations, each with their own militaries. There is no NATO army. There is an agreement of the United States (with its army), the UK (with its army). Germany (with its army), etc.

Each of them could independently invade. They could even negotiate an agreement to invade. But that would have limited impact on NATO. The big thing would be that any invading country loses the agreed upon defenses of the rest.