This problem is not AT ALL about the geometrical shape of the expansion of the universe. It's about 2 different formulas that should give the same result for the rate of the universe, but give different results. I don't blame you, the article title is extremely misleading.
You can just feel your way around. If all the buttons have the same shape, sure, you can't, but they don't have the same shape. For example, if one button has a little raised nub, like the F key in keyboards, you know immediately which button your finger is on.
It's Guenther's time to fock smash some doors
It's great that Linux is a feasible alternative nowadays. But it's not like you are using Ubuntu 10.04 from 2010, right? OSs get outdated and stop being supported. That's just the way it is.
To play the devil's advocate: early cars needed a guy with a flag im front of them because people were used to horses and carriages and not automobiles. After a while that stopped being a thing.
But yeah, self driving cars are not really ready.
Only when they get to the end of life of the cells. If there's another failure before that, it's likely a full failure.
Made me laugh, but strictly speaking, CO2 is fungible (interchangeable), but human lives aren't.
Lutsk is not in Sweden. It's in Ukraine.
After this happened, GitHub added a Download button to their for preview pages. So they themselves considered it was enough of a problem/inconvenience to not have a download button.
I'm not seeing anyone comment on the last paragraph of the article, so I'll paste it here.
With the SteamOS / Steam Deck monthly numbers not showing any magnificent gains, I am curious over this 0.5% increase for Linux gaming overall and whether it's genuine.
The likely explanation is when looking at the demographics and seeing Steam by Chinese users dropping 3.4% while the English usage picked up by 3.4%. Chinese gamers and reporting differences there have previously vastly swayed Steam statistics in prior months.
So this might just be a maths artifact.
Constitution is a text that appears many times on the internet. ChatGPT's training set probably has multiple copies of it. So it's likely ChatGPT will generate it. Therefore, the detectors are likely to flag it as AI-generated. That's what I got from it, but I also found it difficult to parse. Maybe someone can correct me on this.
Language is not controlled by dictionary writers. Dictionaries are descriptive only, they just list what words people are already using. In some countries, central organizations do try to be prescriptive and decide how the languages should be spoken, but that doesn't usually work.