Kogasa

It depends on if you use the “relay” feature. If your server is accessible from the outside it shouldn’t be using this though.

She didn’t step on it, she apparently used her thumb and damaged one of the buns in the pack

Dawg you’re unhinged

It’s not the “where” specifically I’m correcting, it’s the “when.” The model is trained, then the query is run against the trained model. The query doesn’t involve any kind of internet search.

It doesn’t search the internet for cats, it is pre-trained on a large set of labelled images and learns how to predict images from labels. The fact that there are lots of cats (most of which have tails) and not many examples of things “with no tail” is pretty much why it doesn’t work, though.

The argument describes an algorithm that can be translated into code.

1/(1-x)^(2) at 0 is 1

(1/(1-x)^(2) - 1)/x = (1 - 1 + 2x - x^(2))/x = 2 - x at 0 is 2

(1/(1-x)^(2) - 1 - 2x)/x^(2) = ((1 - 1 + 2x - x^(2) - 2x + 4x^(2) - 2x^(3))/x(2) = 3 - 2x at 0 is 3

and so on

If your binding is Alt+X, try pressing it down, tapping shift (press and release), then releasing X. The release keybind shouldn’t trigger.

I tried the workaround with all modifier combinations but this still happens, even if you bind Shift+(Your Binding). Pressing “shift” while the a chord is held prevents the release event from being handled.

Let f(x) = 1/((x-1)^(2)). Given an integer n, compute the nth derivative of f as f^((n))(x) = (-1)^{(n)(n+1)!/((x-1)}(n+2)), which lets us write f as the Taylor series about x=0 whose nth coefficient is f^((n))(0)/n! = (-1)^(-2)(n+1)!/n! = n+1. We now compute the nth coefficient with a simple recursion. To show this process works, we make an inductive argument: the 0th coefficient is f(0) = 1, and the nth coefficient is (f(x) - (1 + 2x + 3x^(2) + … + nx^(n-1)))/x(n) evaluated at x=0. Note that each coefficient appearing in the previous expression is an integer between 0 and n, so by inductive hypothesis we can represent it by incrementing 0 repeatedly. Unfortunately, the expression we’ve written isn’t well-defined at x=0 since we can’t divide by 0, but as we’d expect, the limit as x->0 is defined and equal to n+1 (exercise: prove this). To compute the limit, we can evaluate at a sufficiently small value of x and argue by monotonicity or squeezing that n+1 is the nearest integer. (exercise: determine an upper bound for |x| that makes this argument work and fill in the details). Finally, evaluate our expression at the appropriate value of x for each k from 1 to n, using each result to compute the next, until we are able to write each coefficient. Evaluate one more time and conclude by rounding to the value of n+1. This increments n.

Rant incoming, because I just happened to be dealing with this today.

I tried the push to talk binding method in sway, and found it was extremely fragile because if you press any modifier keys before releasing the button, the release binding won’t trigger and your mic will stay open. This is especially problematic for my use case as I use both my push to talk hotkey and my modifier buttons while gaming.

I just use a toggle mute hotkey instead of push-to-talk though. Just gotta remember to re-mute, and have a visual indicator for your mic status so you don’t accidentally leave it in the wrong state.

Another workaround is binding all possible combinations of modifier keys explicitly, and passing in --device-id so that the binding doesn’t consume the keypress and instead forwards it on to the application. This should perfectly emulate the behavior of an X-style global hotkey. With 4 mods (super, ctrl, shift, alt) and 2 bindings per combination there are 2^5 = 32 total bindings for each such hotkey. However there’s still no telling if the key-release event could be missed somehow and leave your mic open. I don’t know how reliable this method is.

I don’t think you need permission to send someone an email directly addressed to and written for them. I don’t have context for the claims about Kagi being disputed, but I’d be frustrated if someone posted a misinformed rant about my work and then refused to talk to me about it. I might even write an email. Doesn’t sound crazy. If there’s more to the “harassment” that I don’t know about, obviously I’m not in favor.

Your first sentence asserts the claim to be proved. Actually it asserts something much stronger which is also false, as e.g. 0.101001000100001… is a non-repeating decimal which doesn’t include “2”. While pi is known to be irrational and transcendental, there is no known proof that it is normal or even disjunctive, and generally such proofs are hard to come by except for pathological numbers constructed specifically to be normal/disjunctive or not.

I’m a hobbyist speed typer (200wpm+), generally prefer linear switches. I do bottom out almost always. To reduce the impact of bottoming out, if this is an issue for you, you can:

• use a softer and/or more flexible plate. An aluminum or brass plate is very stiff and will absorb less of the impact compared to an FR4 or polycarbonate plate. The mounting style of the keyboard can also affect this, e.g. a gasket mount has the pcb “floating” on rubber pads that absorb shock, and a plate that is screwed directly into a metal chassis will absorb almost nothing. The plate/pcb can have flex cuts added to improve flexibility and absorb more shock.

• use switch springs with a higher actuation force. Common choice is 63.5g or 68g, which is a little heavier than the Akko switches’ ~45g. The spring can also have a variable profile such that the resistance increases more as the spring is depressed, so it kind of cushions the impact a tiny bit. I use extra long springs which has the opposite effect, the response curve is more constant.

• use rubber o-rings on the switches. This will make them feel squishy and I don’t really recommend it, but it’s an option if replacing your keyboard isn’t.

FWIW I mostly use an Odin75 keyboard with an FR4 plate and stock alpaca switches. This is gasket mount + soft plate with lots of flex cuts, so it’s a reasonably soft typing experience.

The eigenvalues of a diagonal matrix are the values on the diagonal. Diagonalizable matrices’ eigenvalues can be determined by diagonalizing them and looking at the entries on the diagonal.

No. sqrt(2) is an irrational number characterized as the positive solution to x^2 - 2 = 0. It’s described by a very small amount of data. Even its decimal expansion can be determined up to any precision by a simple algorithm.

But something has to be written on the birth certificate and social security card, and that’s what everything else will expect you to use. I think just due to technical limitations (e.g. of the printer/template for those things) it wouldn’t be allowed, but I dunno about legally

Keycaps are expensive but you can easily spend $500 on a keyboard chassis/plate/pcb alone

Fractal makes a few good cases, OP’s being one of them. The Define series is more about low volume + high capacity than airflow. All of their cases should have GPU clearance specs so you can tell if you have enough space before buying

Yeah. Normal whoppers are crunchy. 1 in 4 whoppers is soggy and chewy and hard to eat

Whoppers are good but the risk of getting a bad one is not worth it. Ech

I got that banana for my cat. I think the catnip wears off or something but he still likes to have it near him.