If it helps to conceptualize, you can always replace subtraction and division with these equivalents without affecting the order:

a - b
= a + -b
= a + (-1*b)

and

a / b
= a * b^-1
= a * (1/b)

The standard order of operations is

1. Parentheses
2. Exponentiation
3. Multiplication and division
4. Addition and subtraction.

The operations on each row are equivalent, and are executed from left to right.

Are you assuming all addition operations come before all subtraction operations, regardless of order?

It was the standard English printed style in the US and UK from the 1860s until the early 20th century, gradually phasing out by the 1950s.

For printers with variable spaces, it was typical to use a hair space before the punctuation and an em space after.

For more details, see this article on the history of sentence spacing.

charges of transporting undocumented migrants within the U.S.

How is that even a crime? If an undocumented person takes a bus to the immigration office, can they arrest the bus driver?

Weren’t there jokes at the time about them inadvertently building a submarine?

If there’s a new party willing to take over administration of the entire instance as-is, why not just transfer ownership of the original server?

My a priori expectation of where [thing] would be before I knew where it was. (I.e.—if it’s unexpectedly close, it’s “here”; if it’s unexpectedly remote, it’s “there”.)

The justices, in a 9-0 ruling, threw out a lower court‘s decision…

Is it just me, or has there been an uptick in unanimous Supreme Court rulings lately? Could they be doing some behind-the-scenes vote trading in order to appear more unified in their dealings with the executive branch?

They’re busy researching new and exciting ways of denying coverage.

To flesh this out a bit more: suppose Pilate locks Jesus in Joseph of Arimathea’s specially-prepared tomb with the standard Geiger-counter-and-poison setup. After three days the counter has a 50% chance of triggering, leaving the tomb in a superposition of two states:

1. The Geiger counter is triggered, Jesus dies for our sins and is resurrected, and humanity is saved.

2. The Geiger counter isn’t triggered and Jesus’ bid to save humanity fails. But he realizes he can still prevent the rest of humanity from collapsing into a pure damned state: he miraculously changes the wave function of the cave’s contents to be identical to 1, including his own mental state.

After three days the tomb is opened, and a superposition of Jesus 1 and Jesus 2 emerges. Because the two states are indistinguishable, observing it doesn’t cause it to collapse into either pure state. The system remains in superposition until someone observes the fate of a “saved” soul.

Being in a superposition isn’t the same as being unknown or undecided. And I was mostly thinking of their state in the afterlife.

Fun fact: LLMs that strictly generate the most predictable output are seen as boring and vacuous by human readers, so programmers add a bit of randomization they call “temperature”.

It’s that unpredictable element that makes LLMs seem humanlike—not the predictable part that’s just functioning as a carrier signal.

IIRC, they weren’t trying to stop them—they were trying to get the scrapers to pull the content in a more efficient format that would reduce the overhead on their web servers.

This is one thing I can see an actual use case for (as an external tool, not as part of WP): Create a summary, not of the article itself, but of the prerequisite background knowledge. And tailored to the reader’s existing knowledge—like, “what do I need to know to understand this article assuming I already know X but not Y or Z”.

Even if you don’t believe them, they obviously won’t be able to enjoy the vacation unless you avoid the circumstances they’re afraid of—so you might as well humor them.

A Timex-Sinclair 1000 in ’82.

I assume it’s because it reduces the possibility of other processes outside of the linked containers accessing the files (so security and stability).

I get the smallest phone available and don’t use a case because I don’t like the bulk.

I also figure a smaller piece of glass is less likely to break when dropped, so the size is a sort of protection in itself.

• You’re effectively making the given name part of the surname and adding a number to act as the given name. I don’t see any advantage to that over normal naming practice.

• You’re suggesting that the child who shares the parent’s given name is somehow preferred over their siblings, inasmuch as they’re inheriting a tradition their siblings are excluded from.