That looks pretty decent. Could mostly support the OP's use-case, but also could allow sites to trade a cookie for payment, for semi-anonymous pay-for-access.
There are automated checks which can help enforce correctness of the parts of the code that are being checked. For example, we could imagine a check that says "when I add a sprite to the list of assets, then the list of assets becomes one item longer than it was before". And if I wrote code that had a bug here, the automated check would catch it and show the problem without any humans needing to take the time.
But since code can do whatever you write it to do, there's always human review needed. If I wrote code so that adding a sprite also sent a single message to my enemy's Minecraft server then it's not going to fail any tests or show up anywhere, but we need humans to look at the code and see that I'm trying to turn other developers into a DDoS engine.
As others replied, you could choose to find and run someone's branch. This actually does happen with open-source projects: the original author disappears or abandons the project, other people want changes, and someone says "hey I have a copy of the project but with all those changes you want" and we all end up using that fork instead.
But as a tool for evaluating code that'll get merged, it does not work. Imagine you want to check out the new bleeding-edge version of Godot. There's currently ~4700 possible bleeding-edge versions, so which one will you use? You can't do this organically.
Most big projects do have something like beta releases. The humans decide what code changes to merge and they do all that and produce a new godot-beta. The people who want to test out the latest stuff use that and report problems which get fixed before they finally release the finished version to the public. But they could never just merge in random crap and then see if it was a good idea afterward.
She absolutely is profiting from it.
When a game is "free" the publisher isn't just donating it for funzies. Either Epic pays them (Epic is spending money to get people to its platform) or the publisher is using the game to advertise other games, which has value to them.
"Why would anyone in Europe care?"
I think the point of it would be to signal to Trump that Europe is his vassal. Trump says it's sad that this guy is dead, therefore Europe is sad. Doesn't really matter who it is or what's up. You're just following the pledge of fealty.
So, I think it's good that the EU decided they're sovereign for now. This sort of thing is always an ongoing project.
To be fair: it's all the Republicans casting the deciding vote. She doesn't have any special powers that makes her vote count more than the rest. The difference is that she's occasionally not-shitty and so she gets a lot of attention as a maybe.
Like: Rick Scott also cast these deciding votes, but everyone already expected that he'd be a shit so he doesn't get any flak for it.
I think the US will be fine as long as we don't repeatedly elect some kind of cabal of pedophile authoritarians.
There's a lot of externalizing of costs going on. The trucks are idling because the drivers are operating at the slimmest possible margin under the assumption that idling doesn't cost anything.
What we actually would want to get to is that idling does have a cost (environmental, health, pleasantness of the area, etc). And that cost ought to be passed up the chain so that the various goods being shipped are more expensive.
But without a more centrally-managed economy, the implementation is to put all the pressure on the truck drivers and leave them responsible for passing that pressure to the next step up the chain. It doesn't work out very well in practice because the drivers need to make a bunch of capital expenses for something like adding a cab AC and adding a batter-powered lift, but they've been operating at low margins so they're not in a position to do it.
I don't think the article summarizes the research paper well. The researchers gave the AI models simple-but-large (which they confusingly called "complex") puzzles. Like Towers of Hanoi but with 25 discs.
The solution to these puzzles is nothing but patterns. You can write code that will solve the Tower puzzle for any size n and the whole program is less than a screen.
The problem the researchers see is that on these long, pattern-based solutions, the models follow a bad path and then just give up long before they hit their limit on tokens. The researchers don't have an answer for why this is, but they suspect that the reasoning doesn't scale.
Though, do be careful because there are abusive same-sex relationships and sometimes it's even harder to get away because the people around you are telling you "but women can't be abusers!"
As a programmer, DST creates tons of bugs for anything using time and is annoying. But whatever, I guess I get paid either way.
As a parent, DST is miserable. It's miserable as an adult, also, but multiplied misery when you have to get up early to ruin your kid's sleep. And then that night they're not ready to suddenly go to sleep an hour early so you lose an extra hour...
I hope Poland succeeds.
"I found an entirely new way to get out of 'what do you want to get for dinner?'"
It's basically impossible to tell with these between the example being totally fabricated, true but only happens some small percentage of time, true and happens most of the time but you got lucky, and true and reliable but now the company has patched this specific case because it blew up online.