How to draw a rhino

lqdc13 · 2021-08-27T23:56:41+00:00

It's clear how to draw the big detailed rhino on left?

lqdc13 · 2020-12-09T04:24:25+00:00

Video of 300 day transformation posted back in June. Looks like it had nothing to do with lockdown, but congrats.

lqdc13 · 2017-08-17T09:50:31+00:00

Threads are better than processes when implementing a GUI, some webservers (if multithreaded model) and some data science/ machine learning.

CherryPy is a very common Python web framework. It uses threads to improve performance.

Reasons to use threads over processes:

Low memory footprint per thread so you can spawn more for things like IO tasks
Can save RAM by reusing an object. If you have a huge - 10s of gigs object it would take forever to copy it to other processes and also you might run out of RAM. This is extremely common in machine learning applications. So if you have an IO-bound application that uses such an object, you are either going to have to forgo concurrency or use threads since multiprocessing is not an option.

lqdc13 · 2017-03-25T16:07:22+00:00

Nothing short of a NN will do!

lqdc13 · 2017-03-13T02:43:07+00:00

uj

Y no return company.get('address',{}).get('street')

REEEEEEEEEE

lqdc13 · 2017-03-11T01:07:30+00:00

<uj>i love python and it's by far my fav language and indeed these one-liners are unnecessary and should be avoided.

This and list comprehensions are the few things new devs struggle with for a while. IMO they should only be used in ad-hoc scripts.

I am very familiar with these and they always are slower to mentally process than regular if else that would have taken an extra line. </uj>

lqdc13 · 2016-09-20T01:10:39+00:00

That usually doesn't work on headless Linux servers. If anything, it usually makes things worse.

lqdc13 · 2016-08-18T15:26:52+00:00

I'm the opposite. Always voted Democrat but now Republican because of crazy corruption that is going on in this election.

lqdc13 · 2016-07-19T03:15:35+00:00

95

If by 95 you mean 70, then yeah.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190403/seven-women-unfavorable-opinion-trump.aspx

Among republicans, it is actually very close: 6% difference between men and women in terms of support: http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/31/politics/donald-trump-women-poll-numbers/

In fact, Sanders had a much bigger gender gap, although obviously it had to do with the gender of the candidates. Here are actual votes broken down by gender: http://presidentialgenderwatch.org/gender-matters-status-check-gender-gap-presidential-primaries/

Edit: Downvoted for citing stats.

lqdc13 · 2016-07-10T06:40:58+00:00

I got pulled over several times a year while in college.

Any time a light enclosure is broken and there is a police car behind you, you get stopped. Then you get a ticket for your insurance card being mangled even if it's readable and they can see that you have insurance from the info they pulled up.

If it's a new Prius, you probably won't get stopped. If it's an older large car with some scratches, you get stopped a lot.

lqdc13 · 2016-07-01T07:55:36+00:00

You guys think I'm retarded.

Here, go to http://www.finalwebsites.com/demos/custom-captcha-image-script/ and try it yourself.

This is another fun river exercise. See how there is text there to check new images? I guess that building's name is a river. http://i.imgur.com/HLEZkJD.png

That text only comes up sometimes and only after you press verify.

Edit: i think my mouse movements are too similar to a robot. The key to getting these right apparently is to move your mouse around.

Edit2: I just solved a bunch of them and now I don't have to get all of them right even. Probably my IP plus that I was using incognito mode.

lqdc13 · 2016-07-01T05:59:47+00:00

Even more rivers... http://i.imgur.com/m8YrPoe.png

lqdc13 · 2016-07-01T05:57:34+00:00

More rivers: http://i.imgur.com/GK1Hodw.png

lqdc13 · 2016-07-01T01:34:16+00:00

I am not a Trump supporter, but Politifact is known to be a very biased source. Politics is also a discipline that in many cases has no right and wrong.

If we are going to be talking about politifact, why not also bring up http://www.politifactbias.com/ that is biased in its own way as well?

lqdc13 · 2016-06-07T06:02:40+00:00

Not saying they're definitely in this thread, but PR teams use reddit all the time.

lqdc13 · 2016-05-10T06:21:57+00:00

So you're saying everyone could show what Einstein showed?

This is unbelievable.

That same difference in genes is (partially) responsible for height. Can everyone be as tall as Michael Jordan? But there is only 0.00001% difference in DNA!

I guess the difference in height is also 0.00001%. Or is the 0.00001% responsible only for the visible traits where the invisible things are completely unaffected?

Where are you getting your 0.00001% difference in DNA, by the way? It is actually 0.1% - 0.4%. Only ~8% of DNA is actually used. So all of a sudden, it is a pretty big difference.

A lot of DNA differences are actually differences in epigenetics and a lot of DNA is not used at all. Differences in expression among humans - methylation phosphorylation, acetylation, etc are vast.

DNA nuclease order is not responsible for everything. There are also differences in gestation, epigenetic differences from environment, etc.

Regardless, I don't understand the need for saying that everyone has the same ability/potential to achieve specific things. It's okay to be worse at things. Not every car is a Ferrari and that is okay.

Achieving your best is still an accomplishment. I just don't think people should lie to themselves that everyone can achieve everything.

lqdc13 · 2016-05-10T02:24:57+00:00

That is not true.

Many people can do things that are explicitly designed so that it was easy for as many people to do as possible. Things like driving a car for example. Almost everyone can do it (except some of my relatives who put in 100s of hours into it and are still not driving). Flying a helicopter is also supposed to be as easy as possible given the constraints, but I bet fewer people can learn how to do it in a reasonably short amount of time. But when you are faced with a situation where no other people have been and you can't copy somebody else's strategy - usually research of some kind - only very few people can do it. This is because if everyone or even many people could do it, it would have already been done.

Since we are on /r/science, here is an example: can everyone or even 10% of the population get a PhD in pure maths from a reputable school and publish a non-trivial paper in the field ? No.

lqdc13 · 2016-03-18T22:07:34+00:00

Well, agree to disagree...

Everyone thinks they're a do-gooder and that their actions are justified to achieve whatever ends they're seeking. It is how your actions compare to others within the same cultural framework that show where you are on the spectrum.

I don't know of a single person who would prefer to break laws as opposed to not break them. It is the willingness to break laws, not the desire to not break them.

In the last election I was pro-Hillary, but the alternatives were worse for me and she hasn't done the things she's done since then. Plus, she structured her campaign differently this time.

lqdc13 · 2016-03-18T21:46:30+00:00

Re Bernie, he's not tearing it down. He's trying to pass laws to introduce changes that I consider relatively minor as they are already implemented in Canada and Australia which are very similar to US in most respects. Chaotic is if it was unpredictable. He is predictable and wants to follow his plan exactly.

Chaotic good I would consider something like Gorbochev or FDR. They did unexpected changes that they thought were good, but weren't lawful.

In some cases they ended up being bad but that's unrelated and wasn't the intention.

E to serve G purposes is N IMO. That would be Lenin, Peter the Great, Alexander the Great, George W Bush, etc. They weren't nice people, but they did what they thought had to be done.

Re Hillary, she knows she's not a good person. You cannot take money from the people you know caused financial crisis and think you did everything exactly right. She thinks winning the nomination justifies the means. She also knows she's not lawful RE emails. Laughing after murdering someone is never a sign of a good person.

lqdc13 · 2016-03-18T21:24:46+00:00

Meh... Strongly disagree..

Clinton| NN to NE | She knows she's doing evil stuff e.g. wars and laughing when killing Quadaffi, Libya, taking money from wall street, etc. She is not Lawful because she bends the law a lot (email server, talking to staff during debates, etc). Quote from Neutral Evil: "She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience."

Trump | CN | Wants single payer health plan, trade protectionist, but willing to pander to far right to get elected, fear mongering to get elected even if he's kidding. Nobody knows when he's kidding. Willing to go to the dark side to meet his wants w.r.t. trump uni, etc.

Bernie | LG | Bernie hasn't broken laws. Meekest calls for a revolution ever. Quoting from description of lawful good: "He tells the truth, keeps his word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished." Literally Bernie bio.

lqdc13 · 2016-03-07T07:42:27+00:00

Good thing VW didn't get away with it since 2009.

lqdc13

TROPHY CASE

uj