|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Note that I'd use the word "remarkable" for hollywood, too, but not in quite the same context.
"Remarkable" is a more neutral word than most people make it out to be. I've always taken it to mean that something is likely to have remarks made about it. It doesn't specify that said remarks are either positive or negative...
|
|
|
|
|
I tend to use it in the self-fulfilling way: "I am remarking that this is remarkable because it's remarkable".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Reportedly profit, but speaks in parables (7)
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Prophet = speaks in parables
sounds like = reportedly
profit
modified 12-Feb-20 5:57am.
|
|
|
|
|
Well done!
You are up for tomorrow...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Reportedly gains gives too much of the answer away ( just sayin ) - sounds like you are for ( pro ) sudden attacks ( fits ) would have been better . Nice little clue though
"We can't stop here - this is bat country" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you! Picked the word from a list of indicators used in crossword clues... There was a huge list and it was a good fit from those I understood...
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
pkfox wrote: Reportedly gains gives too much of the answer away
Hey, he made a promise to give an easy clue and he followed through with that promise! I, for one, commend his commitment...
...although it still took me 5 minutes to solve because I was trying too hard
|
|
|
|
|
1. Jack likes Jill 80% of the time with an intensity of 75%
2. Jill likes Jack 70% of the time with an intensity of 65%
3. When it's a sunny day, 6 times out of ten sunny days: Jack and Jill will go up the Hill
4. When it's overcast, or raining: they go up the Hill 1 out of 15 overcast days.
5. When Jack and Jill are up the Hill:
5a. Jack likes Jill with an intensity of 80~99%
5b. Jill likes Jack with an intensity of 76~90%
6. there is a pattern of quantum fluctuations in Jack's liking Jill based on the extent to which Jill likes Jack.
7. there is a pattern of quantum fluctuations in Jill's liking Jack based on the extent to which Jack likes Jill. So, you have some external factors: weather, location (up/down the Hill).
And, you have some dynamic variation/interdependency in the intensity of "liking." An obvious complexity in the interdependency is the quantization suggested: that's left unspecified here, but let's assume there is some mechanism at play that tends to stabilize (prevent recursion) as their states change (an analogy would be using the Solver in Excel to solve linear and nonlinear optimization problems). fyi: I believe that the act of verbal interaction between people involves this type of status/role/context "negotiation" to establish a conceptual frame; I don't expect you to
Just to give a hint about how you might implement a reciprocal relationship:
public class RelationStates<T>
{
public string Source { get; }
public string Target { get; }
public Dictionary<string, (T, T)> RelStates;
public Func<(T, T), string> GetStateFunc;
public string GetState((T, T) values)
{
return GetStateFunc?.Invoke(values);
}
public RelationStates(string source, string target, Dictionary<string, (T, T)> relstates = null)
{
Source = source;
Target = target;
RelStates = relstates ?? new Dictionary<string, (T, T)>();
}
} Sample usage:
RelationStates<int> JackToJill = new RelationStates<int>(
"Jack", "Jill",
new Dictionary<string, (int, int)>
{
{"indifferent", ( 0,10) },
{"warm", (20,40) },
{"friendly", (50,79) },
{"intimate", (85, 90) },
{"love", (95,100) }
});
JackToJill.GetStateFunc = tuple => { return "not implemented"; };
var state = JackToJill.GetState((23, 24)); I predict your mind already began sketching out some interesting function to do the required mapping of an arbitrary pair of input "like" numbers to one of the "quantized states" Jack can be in vis-a-vis Jill.
For me, of interest is how a mutual dependency can be implemented so that Jack's change of state can be modulated by Jill's change of state, and vice-versa. Throw in the weather, and location for flavoring.
One idea might be to have each state function invoke other functions based on something like: Jack's and Jill's functions exchange measures of state change magnitude with each other ?
Remember: all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: I predict your mind already began...
My mind ain't doing jack at the moment.
BillWoodruff wrote: JackToJill.GetStateFunc = tuple => { return "not implemented"; }; // yes, this compiles !
This intrigues me... but see above for current state of mind. I may process it at some point today.
Scrap that, I didn't see you have GetStateFunc defined in the class ( I thought the "Func" suffix was some sort of wizardry)... I'm going to stop writing now until I wake up
|
|
|
|
|
musefan wrote: My mind ain't doing jack at the moment. We respect your gender preferences.
musefan wrote: I'm going to stop writing now until I wake up Okay, please note we do treasure shared fantasies
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
modified 12-Feb-20 5:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
musefan wrote: My mind ain't doing jack at the moment. Is it doing jill?
|
|
|
|
|
If it wasn't, it is now
|
|
|
|
|
All I'm gonna say is that the version of the Jack and Jill story I learned is somewhat different...and not appropriate to share with the lounge.
|
|
|
|
|
Air Italy stops flying and goes into liquidation - CNN[^]
Letting customers book tickets and then ceasing operations sounds ridiculous.
And on the larger view, I guess a huge shift is happening in the Airlines industry and most of them are not adapting to it faster. I'm not sure what that is shift is all about though. May be a lot of "startup airlines" providing the service dirt-cheap?
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: ...and goes into liquidation of course they won't let you down mid air!
It says right there - "goes into liquidation" - they're letting people down into the sea or a nearby lake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: huge shift is happening in the Airlines industry
Not just in the Airlines industry, but also in the Aircraft Manufacturers industry, as we can see from the current scenario at Boeing.
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: Letting customers book tickets and then ceasing operations sounds ridiculous. That's how it goes.
You don't go about telling everyone you're going bankrupt so don't buy from us.
If Italy has the same social system as the Netherlands, (then ex-)employees will be paid by the government so they don't lose salary.
Unfortunately, creditors have priority over customers, so rich investors get (some of) their money back, while customers are left out in the cold.
The real tragedy is that the people who are responsible probably get a million € "golden handshake" while they've already been making millions with mismanaging the company.
|
|
|
|
|
Except that if you read the article, it says people with tickets between now and the 25th will be flying on planes operated by someone else; people after that point are getting refunds. So customers actually are getting treated better than normal; which is weird enough that I'm assuming Italian law is to blame.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: Letting customers book tickets and then ceasing operations sounds ridiculous. That seems to be the way big companies still operate. Thomas Cook (holiday company in UK) did exactly the same last year. They were taking holiday and flight bookings up to the day before they announced they were bust, with debts of almost £1,000,000,000 (yes, nearly a billion owing).
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: they were bust, with debts of almost £1,000,000,000 (yes, nearly a billion owing) A lot of companies are zombies that are relying on historically low interest rates (thanks to central wbankers) to keep rolling over their debt. The next downturn and credit crunch are going to make 2007/2008 look like a picnic.
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: Letting customers book tickets and then ceasing operations sounds ridiculous. <Fat F***er mode>
Of course it does, to you, because you just don't understand how things work!
If we told everyone that we were putting the company into liquidation, then everyone would have known, and we couldn't have made ourselves a quick couple of million each, through speculation!
Even worse, people would have had time to scrutinise the salary increases and bonuses we gave ourselves, a few months ago!
Doing that would have been ridiculous!
</Fat F***er mode>
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It's an opportunity to steal from the public without repercussion, a corporation is morally required to take that opportunity. As are you, unless you're some kind of communist.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: a corporation is morally required to take that opportunity
That's the insane truth of free markets: the system that always favors the rich over the poor. In theory our goverments could regulate it, but in truth the governments of the world are the sock puppets of the industry.
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|