> What's that? You say you want even more infuriating font stories? Well don't you worry, I'll be back soon with another diatribe about font thickness and antialiasing on the web on Mac vs. Windows.
Did he ever write about this? I can't see anything about it in his list of articles.
This probably isn't related to semantic CSS, but the "Semantic version" isn't working properly. If I open "https://nuejs.org/@spotlight/" and then click on an article, then try to return to the previous page, it will change the URL but not the page itself. This happens on both Firefox and Chrome.
There is an argument out there that the 15 and 21 factorizations involved built in knowledge of the answer. If you accept that then there has been zero progress demonstrated so far for factoring numbers using quantum effects, not just a ridiculously small amount of progress.
At this rate, just 2510*1.5 years and we will crack all current AES. Hopefully we will be using 512 bit keys by then. 512 bits should be enough for anyone.
The proof is not rejected because people don't understand it, it's rejected because people don't think the proof is correct.
If the proof was translated to Lean, then it would mean a lot if it managed to prove the ABC conjecture because it would mean the proof was correct. It doesn't matter if the proof used crazy definitions. The statement of the ABC conjecture would still be understandable and so the ABC conjecture would be solved.
> During an experiment to produce gynogenic Russian sturgeon progeny, a negative control was initiated using non-irradiated American paddlefish sperm and eggs from the Russian sturgeon. Unexpectedly, the control cross resulted in viable hybrids.
I'm not a biologist, but I guess it's the "gynogenic" part that's hard to do?
> The initial goal of the study was to encourage the critically endangered sturgeon to reproduce asexually. That isn’t quite how it went.
The focus of the study was the critically endangered sturgeon.
The other species was needed since:
> in gynogenesis, the DNA of the sperm specimen isn’t supposed to transfer to the offspring.
They deliberately picked a distant species (not in the same genus, and not even in the same family) to use as a negative control. But, accidentally, their negative control group "found a way to live" (in their words)!
> American paddlefish are also protected under Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) meaning international trade in the species (including parts and derivatives) is regulated
I suppose if I want to complain about the wiki article being badly written, I should probably think about working on it myself. It's pretty misleading.
As far as these being distantly related species, they are, but they're also as closely related as you can get without being in Acipenser. They're separate families, but those are the only two families within the suborder Acipenseroidei. Super neat fishes. I highly recommend looking up videos of baby paddlefish, as they're adorable. My favorite is when they're just old enough that they start switching to filter feeding. Handling sturgeon just makes you feel like you've got something ancient in your hands, which you kind of do.
What's interesting to me is that the paddlefish shares the Missouri River with both the shovelnose sturgeon and the pallid sturgeon. Also possibly the lake sturgeon if I'm remembering correctly that they sometimes come down the Missouri a bit especially during flood years. Makes me wonder if it's just luck that those sturgeon species aren't tetraploid or if tetraploid individuals are produced and selected against as they hybridize with paddlefish for potentially less well-adapted progeny.
I think you're exaggerating a little when you say "site:youtube.com" doesn't work. If I search 'site:youtube.com apple watch' I get 143 000 000 results, and if I search something more specific like 'site:youtube.com "Featuring Dr James Grime"' I'll find exactly what I'm looking for. But you're correct that it doesn't seem to search video comments, only titles and descriptions.
The problem I ran into is that, like I said, YouTube doesn't seem to get indexed by hypertext inward-edges from other sites like a regular website does — and so you can't search by how you recall a video being described in pages that link to it; instead, you have to remember how the video describes itself. Which it may not always do well.
As a non-native English speaker, I appreciate pedantic editors like this one a lot. When I read Wikipedia, I want the text to be easy to understand and consistent with the rest of Wikipedia and when I edit, I want people to improve what I wrote. I wish everything I wrote had a copy-editor as pedantic as Wikipedia power users.
Some people are complaining about overly zealous editors who delete a lot of and as an Inclusionist [1] I understand the sentiment. I think deleting information from Wikipedia is pretty bad. But being pedantic about English is not deleting information, it's improving the transmission of information.
I don't agree with you. Comprise is a directional word, similar in that sense to surjective. If someone were to write injective when they mean surjective, I might be able to correctly interpret the intended meaning based on context, but that doesn't make the language consistent and it serves as a hurdle to understanding the text.
Did he ever write about this? I can't see anything about it in his list of articles.