No. The alternative is to not use a float. Testing if a float is even simply does not make sense.
Even testing two floats for equality rarely makes sense.
What is the correct output of isEven((.2 + .4) ×10)
Hint: (.2 + .4) x 10 != 6
No. The alternative is to not use a float. Testing if a float is even simply does not make sense.
Even testing two floats for equality rarely makes sense.
What is the correct output of isEven((.2 + .4) ×10)
Hint: (.2 + .4) x 10 != 6
If you are using floats, you really do not want to have an isEven function …
Admit that the project of establishing a democratic Jewish state has failed, and try to salvage a democratic state out of the rubble.
Not sex related, but I learned it in sex ed. Most males do not have a big depression in their chest. Turns out that the males in my family happened to have a condition known as Pectus Excavatum.
I, for one, fully support Israel because it seems like you get in less trouble for that.
Some may call me a coward for this decision. To this, I can only say the following: If a coward is a person who avoids taking a difficult stance on topics for personal expediency, then “coward” is a badge I will gladly wear, again and again and again.
https://www.theonion.com/the-onion-stands-with-israel-because-it-seems-like-yo-1850922505
It’s not just Christians. I’ve been called anti semetic by some right wing extened family at holiday meals; and by some teachers at the Jewish day school I attended.
Ah, the endless 8 approach.
The UK is not supporting Hamas, so their is no point in protesting their support for Hamas. If you want to fly to Iran and protest their support of Hamas, that would make sense.
The BBC also doesn’t call them terrorists:
So, will the people currently living in the to be annexed territory be allowed to become Israeli citizens and retain full rights to their homes? Will the people who left northern Gaza at the instruction of Israel (instructions which Israel used to justify their bombing campaign), be allowed to return to their homes as Israeli citizens?
Will the conditions in a smaller and more densely populated Gaza; where Israeli annexation is now fresh in everyone’s living memory be less conducive to terrorism. Will this help Israel’s relationship with its Arab neighboors, which had been seeing significant normalization prior to Hamas’s attack?
I’ve been hereing a lot of people warn of this offensive as being a second Nakba. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba Comparing this reporting with what happened in the Nakba, that seems like a scaringly likely prediction.
Looking at how the first Nakba turns out, it is hard to see how anyone can think repeating it will end well for Israel.
It is standard in the US. Adjustable rate mortgages are available as well, but they have not been popular since the 2008 crisis.
Beyond just ‘not ok’, Israel’s response is playing out exactly how the terrorist’s playbook says the terrorized country should respond: terrorist launches a terrorist attack, terrorized country responds with forced, civilians hit in the crossfire blame the terrorized country and move towards the terrorists.
In the past few days, we have been hering Israeli officials refer to this as their 9/11. What they do not seem to appreciate with their comparison is that the emotion ladden responce the US engaged in after 9/11 proved to be one of the greatest military blunders in the countries history.
If they want to learn a lesson from 9/11, they should address the immediate military threat, fix the security and intelligence failures that allowed the attack to be so successful (such as diverting soldiers away from the Gaza border; and (allegedly) ignoring warnings that Hamas was planning an attack). Once the immediate concerns are addressed, they should back off and allow time for cooler heads to think through what a strategically effective response would look like and implement that.
Unfortunately, such a response is politically difficult in the best of circumstances. Given that the current ruling coalition is almost the definition of hotter heads, built itself up on the promise of “security”, and was already on shaky ground domestically, I don’t think they have many options other than a rash response.
Hopefully they constrain themselves to just responding in Gaza. If they decide to respond by going after Hamas’s supporters in, say Iran, we are looking at a major regional war.
Israel and Palestine are both countries. Private ownership does not factor into the equation. If you get into the weeds, part of the dispute is a claim of private property rights that predate Israel. But even that duspute could be viewed through the lense of collective rights.
That’s not how it works. I don’t know what social media is involved, but from according to Facebook’s TOS, you grant Meta a revocable license to use it it a manner consistent with your privacy settings.
Specifically, when you share, post, or upload content that is covered by intellectual property rights on or in connection with our Products, you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, and worldwide license to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate, and create derivative works of your content (consistent with your privacy and application settings). This means, for example, that if you share a photo on Facebook, you give us permission to store, copy, and share it with others (again, consistent with your settings) such as Meta Products or service providers that support those products and services. This license will end when your content is deleted from our systems.
There is a potential fair use argument to be had (particularly since the allegedly infringing party is news). And it is not clear from the article who owns the original copyright in the first place.
There is only one country whose national religion is Judaism, but it is practiced in plenty of other places.
More to the point, the fact that there are other Islamic countries is of little comfort to the Palestinians. They do not live in those countries and those countries do not want them.
Some of those countries do provide varying levels of support for Hamas because they (accurately) see it as an indirect way to attack Israel.
By the same token, any blame you want to place on Israel for this conflict reflects on Isreal as whole, and not every individual living within it.
I had the good fortune of meeting a couple of board game nerds before getting into the hobby myself. They had a seperate insurance policy specifically for their games.
Facebook the product is still Facebook. The only name that changed was that of the company that owns Facebook, which makes sense as that holding company also runs other products like Instagram.
Google made a similar move in 2015 when it created Alphabet to hold the non Google parts of Google.
In both cases the renaming was on the coorporate side. They made no effort to loose the old trademark, and continue to operate under it today.
The only high profile case that comes to mind that is simmilar to Twitter is when Comcast rebranded itself as Xfinity in 2010. In that case, it worked because: A) Comcasts reputation was way worse than Twitters and B) people don’t have that much of an option anyway. In the otherhand, the rebranding failed in the sense that everyone still knows them as Comcast.
But if you direct people to forcibly take a kid to a camp that uses face punching as a “therapeutic” treatment, while endorsing said camp with your national platform…
Technically that might not be “direct” violence, but it is pretty direct indirect violence.
Neutral and Israel alligned countries have been calling for a humanatarian pause on purely humanitarian grounds. Even if you don’t care about the hostages, that Hamas was willing to offer them means that they had an interest in such a pause as well; making Israel the only obstacle to it happening. That is to say, the severity of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is squarly on Israel’s shoulders. The most charitable reading of the situation is that they have determined that the tactical advantage of blocking a humanitarian pause outways the civilian lives they put at risk by doing so.