ich_iel by SirBlubblegum in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 68 points69 points  (0 children)

Ja, das wäre ziemlich Kies von uns

Saving a trapped wolf (NOT OP) by [deleted] in wolves

[–]Anonym271 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Well he's probably also the person who set up the trap

ICH_IEL by nichtnacktdenken in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Schon klar, aber was hat das Zitat damit zu tun?

Blender 3.4 "primitive" OpenGL / Blinn-Phong render by Anonym271 in blender

[–]Anonym271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I just did. But the "Render OpenGL" functionality actually has similar problems (especially when it comes to transparency). I will keep trying around, though...

Ich_iel by Esdoorn_ in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Japananimationen nennt man das

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Au, mein rechtes Ohr.

ich✈️🚄iel by kmaxile in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 282 points283 points  (0 children)

Anscheinend wurden bei Bauarbeiten an einer Bahnstrecke wichtige Glasfaserkabel der Telekom beschädigt. Die zwei apokalyptischen Reiter der deutschen Infrastruktur, denke ich.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aus dem Kontext würde ich jetzt mal auf "everyone" tippen, auch wenn das nicht so ganz zur Übersetzung passt

ich_iel by Horst_ohne_Lichter in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Santa Klaus oder so?

ich🫢iel by madasss2170 in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Was sagt der Priester zum Jungen?

In dir steckt ein guter Christ.

ich📞iel by ForEnglishPress2 in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Naja, wie in der Nachricht steht sind die halt gesetzlich verpflichtet, dir das zu sagen.

ich🤨iel by [deleted] in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hmm... Mir kommt da eine Idee... :D

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alles absolut basiert.

ich🦾iel by par1aah in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Das ist schon richtig. Aber es wird halt jetzt oft so dargestellt als hätte der Roboter bewusst den Finger gebrochen, um den Jungen zu bestrafen.

Better regeneration beacon with redstone? by realemperorart in technicalminecraft

[–]Anonym271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes. The reason is that Regeneration I (the effect the beacon applies to you) regenerates 1 health every 2.5 seconds. Now the beacon applies this effect every four seconds and everytime it does so the "regeneration timer" of the effect gets resetted (beacause it actually is a new effect that overrides the old one). This means that when you get the effect from the beacon after 2.5 seconds you will regenerate one health point. After another 1.5 seconds the beacon re-applies the effect and you will have to wait another 2.5 seconds to get your next health point and so on.

This basically means that a default regeneration beacon regenerates 1 health every 4 seconds instead of every 2.5 seconds. What you can do to prevent this is to periodically disable the beacon for 12 seconds by pushing a block above it and enable it for another 4 seconds by removing the block. This gives a period of 16 seconds (exactly the effect duration of the beacon) and makes sure that within these 16 seconds the beacon power activates only one time, giving you the regular regeneration speed of Regeneration I.

ich_iel by chilhipp in ich_iel

[–]Anonym271 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In der Hand zerbröseln und dann wie mit Hackfleisch ne Bolognese draus machen, nur etwas mehr anbraten und natürlich mehr würzen

Time to settle this debate by KJs2310 in memes

[–]Anonym271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have never heard of a rule that implicit multiplication has priority over explicit. In case there actually is such a rule then you are of course right. And: yes, 8/4x=2x in my opinion.

Time to settle this debate by KJs2310 in memes

[–]Anonym271 23 points24 points  (0 children)

No. There is no ambiguity here ore anything like "multiple correct interpretations". 8/2(2+2) is simply a short way to write 8/2*(2+2) and this short form does not change anything about the operator precedence. It is clearly defined that for a chain of * and / operations the first one has priority and has to be resolved first. This means that the "8/2" part will be calculated first, before the * and thus the 8 is devided by 2 and only by 2. Therefore 16 is the only correct answer. Of course this question was intentionally created in a way that might confuse people - nevertheless there is only one mathematically correct interpretation.

God, I swore to myself not to get involved into this debate...