I prescribe 20 hours of KSP to everyone involved, that'll set them right.

RMarkdown isn't going anywhere! Quarto exists to bring the RMarkdown experience that folks love to a broader set of users and contexts. It is true that we try to keep the .qmd experience in Quarto pretty close to the .rmd experience in RMarkdown, and it is true that Quarto does things that RMarkdown never will. But it's not the case that "RMarkdown is being phased out and replaced with Quarto".

If you want the serious version of the idea instead of the LLM diarrhea, just go Jonathan Shewchuk’s robust predicates work: https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jrs/papers/robustr.pdf from 1997.

- there's competition, and so if it's possible to rent for less than 1000-eps and still profit, someone will

- there's no competition, which is a cartel, the kind of thing that civilized societies ought to frown upon

I'm confident about this assessment because I maintain a large-ish piece of software and perenially have to decipher user reports of hallucinated LLM syntax for new features.

If you truly believe that, please do yourself a favor and read “The tyranny of structurelessness” to understand what a managerless place becomes. everyone and no one becomes a manager, and there’s no explicit avenue of recourse. There’s a good reason management arises. We can discuss good management vs bad management, but pretty fundamentally there’s no such thing as “no management”.

However, I then pasted the emoji into the _query_ part of a URL. I pointed it to my own website, and sure enough, I can definitely see the payload in the nginx logs. Yikes.

Edit: I pasted the very same Emoji that 'paulgb used in their post before the parenthetical in the first paragraph, but it seems HN scrubs those from comments.

The parent comment is harshly criticizing (fairly, in my view) a paper, and not the authors. Smart people can write foolish things (ask me how I know). It’s good, actually, to call out foolishness, especially in a concrete way as the parent comment does. We do ourselves no favors by being unkind to each other. But we also do ourselves no favors by being unnecessarily kind to bad work. It’s important to keep perspective.

The OP didn't accuse Republicans of being non-people. They specifically made a -- true, incidentally -- factual claim:

> > That's why they spread lies about refugees and other legal immigrants, right

It is notable, though, that it is the Republican candidate that has very directly been using dehumanizing language. And you are here asking people to get into a both-sides argument. The situation isn't symmetric: the arguments shouldn't have to be.

> I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy

Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.

> Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded.

Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.

(To reproduce exactly the scenario being discussed, you fit a constant-only model to the data using least squares: that gives the average as the best fit. Then, you measure the leverage of each point of interest.)