Bush's settlement policies didn't work at all. West Bank settlements drastically increased in the years following that showdown. Can you look at a graph and spot the point where Bush "brought Israel in line"?
(I kind of like Bush 1, at least as a competent operator with some discernible principles, and think Israeli settlement of the West Bank is abhorrent).
This often comes up when writing a function which returns a wrapper over a generic type (like Option<T>). If your Option type is T | null, then there's no way to distinguish between a null returned by the function or a null that is part of T.
As a concrete example, consider a map with a method get(key: K) -> Option<V>. How do you tell the difference between a missing key and a key which contains `null` as a value?
There's a quote from Michelson that "the future truths of physical science are to be looked for in the sixth place of decimals". Many misinterpret this to be a statement that 'there's nothing new to be discovered', but his actual point was that discovering new science requires rigorously searching out and understanding even small deviations in measurements.
Here's the full quote:
"While it is never safe to affirm that the future of Physical Science has no marvels in store even more astonishing than those of the past, it seems probable that most of the grand underlying principles have been firmly established and that further advances are to be sought chiefly in the rigorous application of these principles to all the phenomena which come under our notice. It is here that the science of measurement shows its importance — where quantitative work is more to be desired than qualitative work. An eminent physicist remarked that the future truths of physical science are to be looked for in the sixth place of decimals."
Yes it does, you have to manipulate the expression to make it adimensional. But this rule-of-thumb is only valid for systems whose response time is less than 500ms.
See also Windows setting menus. People see this as a flaw, but I much prefer that to breaking existing functionality for the sake of a redesign. Make a new interface for simple usecases, but keep the old one around just in case.
For instance, MIT recently had a bunch of hate speech (against LGBTQ people) posted around campus. In response, MIT... defended the actions and encouraged students to post their own countermessages rather than take down the hateful posters: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/recent-postering
If anything, MIT has been more forceful in setting limits on pro-Palestinian demonstrations than on anti-LGBTQ speech.
Haha what? this is the best example you can find? Those "anti LGBTQ" flyers were satirical attacks _from the left_ on the recently adopted MIT free speech policy.
First of all, the posters were not obviously satirical (as evidenced by the letter I linked). The intent of the posters only matters if you think MIT left the posters up because they had a leftward intent but a rightward message. But MIT made their decision before knowing the identity or politics behind the posters.
This isn't the only example, but it is one that straightforwardly shows that MIT is consistent with regards to its free speech policies.
You accuse me of arguing dishonestly. Instead, why don't you present your evidence that MIT has acted against its policy in an official capacity?
> "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking 'bout new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
> "It was not always a given that the United States and America would have a close relationship"
> "Who could have possibly considered an erection in Iraq at this point in history?"
> "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."
Reagan did it with a single phone call: https://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/13/world/reagan-demands-end-...