I actually blocked deepwiki from all my searches because I was fooled multiple times by the slop into thinking I’m doing something wrong while using the library, only to discover that the „documentation“ showed utter bullshit.
It’s also demonizing doctors and the healthcare system a bit too much for my liking.
I’m located in Europe, so I may have a slightly different view, but my doctors clearly care and discuss with me about prevention, risks, tradeoffs, …
They praise the methods of the „good“ doctors and stamps the others as driven by financial gain. Who says the expensive ones are any better in this regard? Who says they are more or less exaggerating the importance of test results to make you come back?
In the US my best doctors produce out of date advice about obvious things, have a very distinct gap between "everyday" (stuff they actually see) and "incredibly rare" (stuff unique enough to be a case study they heard about) in their knowledge/understanding and rarely advise things that require me to be a proactive and rational person (because they don't serve these often), so they'll spend two seconds being like "diet and exercise" without a discussion on how that'd work or what adjustments I'd actually make (leaving me to do this research myself) and then suggest a prescription (because even their least proactive patient will probably take a pill). They'll wait until things become a disorder before addressing them (or discussing with me how to address them).
The worst will basically laugh me out of their office for daring to belong to a marginalized identity or failing to already have the health knowledge I'm there trying to gain from them.
Maybe I have awful luck... but I have very little faith at this point. The most effective relationship I had was with a hack who was willing to just prescribe whatever I asked him for and order whatever tests I asked him for (I think most of his patient base were college students seeking amphetamine salts).
I'm in the US, and my experience has been similar. My doctor is good, and while we're usually limited to 30 minutes at my appointment, we have good conversations and rarely is his answer "here is another pill" or "go take this random test."
can tangled support a forum-styled or subreddit-like thread discussion interface, on a per-repo basis so that "anyone could start a subreddit" via creating a discussion-only repo?
> public-inbox implements the sharing of an email inbox via git to complement or replace traditional mailing lists. Readers may read via NNTP, IMAP, POP3, Atom feeds or HTML archives.
We’ve considered this a lot. Our issues implementation is threaded—perhaps more Stack Overflow-like. We’re thinking of renaming it to Discussions, and having the actual issue tracker be collaborators-only.
A lot of interviews are of the "is this a real person, and are they reasonably competent on their feet?" variety … which is hard to gauge through email.
I'm guessing that's a big part of what the AI is assessing here.
> Why is it even necessary to be an interview?
I do think this question is an important one at this point: is companies fielding mountains of resumes and trying to parse them in an automated way the best way for the humans and the company?
If the goal is "get a qualified candidate" (with as little waste as possible), we feel very far from that.
Basically it removes excess water from the filter, creating less soggy pucks. Easier to clean. I imagine the rapid depressurisation "upwards" may cause the puck to move a bit upwards, again, making it easier to remove.
I have the same impression. I guess the machine is completely passive regarding temperature and requires a) a preheated water source and b) a hot-water flush before each use to heat the machine and push hot water into the hoses
I admit to not having that much experience in prolog, but I'm having a hard time translating the time parameter `[n]` into executable prolog. Anyone got a clue?
