[+] -17 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Students are notorious for just skimming instructions, so teachers are known to hide an instruction that directs the student to do something silly. If the student includes that silly thing in their answer, that means they thoroughly read all the directions. If they did not include that silly thing, that is proof that at best, they just skimmed the instructions.

Saying "I failed these students because I instructed them to do something and they did it" doesn't quite seem like the right way to attempt to fight this. That seems like it would net a lot of false positives from students who aren't sure exactly what sort of games the teacher is trying to play.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    There's a second filter policy fetched over HTTP every time the app loads. It isn't in the git repository. It's unauthenticated and world-readable, so anyone can pull it. Right now it carries 552 user accounts, 2,275 username patterns, 54 instances, 97 communities, 289 keyword patterns and 351 domains, with every category set to hide matches rather than flag them. Not collapsed behind a click. Simply absent, with no indication anything was removed.

    Verify all of it in ten seconds

    curl -s https://tesseract.dubvee.org/tesseract/api/system/policy \
      | base64 -d | gunzip > policy.json
    

    Oh, is that why my self-hosted Tesseract instance had stopped working while DubVee was down for maintenance?

    https://feddit.org/post/6042872

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Not sure if that is just a joke I'm not picking up on. But those are very obviously prosthetic teeth, and someone went out of their way to design them to be crooked, etc. That comment is pointing out that realistically, from a biological/evolutionary perspective or whatever, those prosthetics should be very straight teeth.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 12 points 1 day ago

    Besides, I think it rather obvious that Patrick is going through some shit. Has been for a while.

    Again, not that this excuses a block list like this, but they had made a post in the 30 Rock community about how their childhood friend is in a medically induced coma. I cannot remember if there was any follow-up, but they were indeed "going through some shit".

    Canonical link: https://dubvee.org/post/3610056

    Mirror: https://quokk.au/post/27539

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    In Stargate SG-1 S7E3 "Fragile Balance", we see a close-up of Jack's United States Air Force identification card of some sort which clearly indicates his name is "O'NEILL, JOHN J." But basically every wiki article out there about the character indicates that his name is "Jonathan".

    Is that correct? As far as I can tell, Jack's ID here indicates that his legal name is "John". If his legal name was actually "Jonathan", that is what would be on his military ID. Yes, most people who go by the nickname "John" are actually named "Jonathan" as their full legal name, but that is not always the case. There is no reason to assume that someone's military ID has a nickname printed on it, right? If someone's military ID indicates that their name is "John", I think it is safe to assume their full legal first name is just "John".

    As far as I can tell, there is no indication in the show as to what Jack's full legal name is other than this quick closeup of his USAF ID. The only time the name "Jonathan" is ever actually spoken in Stargate SG-1 is Kinsey clearly talking to his driver in S5E10 "2001". That seems to just be a coincidence, for all we can tell. The name "John" is spoken a few times, but again, always clearly about some other person.

    This concept of a legal "John" (not "Jonathan") going by "Jack" is a fairly common occurrence. Think JFK, Jack Nicholson, Jack Welch, Jack Donaghy, etc. Not as common as a legal "Jonathan" going by "John", but it happens. Jack O'Neill actually having the legal name "John" is definitely not unprecedented.

     

    I want to buy a new keyboard. My use case for this particular keyboard will be as what you might consider a tertiary keyboard. I do not need a new primary keyboard that I spend most of my time with on my main computer. I also do not need a new secondary keyboard to keep at my other workstation that I interact with often when not using my primary workstation. What I need is a keyboard that will be my go-to for miscellaneous tasks. When I need to plug into some server temporarily, I want to use this keyboard. When I need to set up a new computer that will later be used by another user with a "normal" keyboard, I want to use this keyboard. Currently, I use a basic office keyboard for this task. I can move it from computer to computer, and it works reliably for these occasional miscellaneous tasks. But after having switched to using split ergo as my primary/secondary keyboards, using this traditional keyboard even occasionally does feel off. If I can, I would like a split ergo that can fill this use case.

    This means I want a few specifications that are not common for split ergonomic keyboards:

    • Unibody. I will often not be using this keyboard at a desk or other optimal position. As such, having two halves to the keyboard can be cumbersome. I might be just resting the keyboard on my knee or something for a few minutes while I type on it. For this purpose, it would be simpler to have a keyboard that is just one single unit with one single cable.
    • 100%. Most split ergos have just a few dozen keys. This makes sense for a keyboard that I am going to use often and can memorize the layout and all the various layers. But this is a keyboard that I plan to only use occasionally. As such, I want to be able to look at the keys to hunt/peck if I need. I do not want to have to remember what sequence of keys is used to press Alt+F4. I want to look at the keyboard, find the key that is labelled Alt, find the key that is labelled F4, and press those two keys.

    There are also a few other relevant specs that it seems are very common, but I wanted to mention them anyway:

    • USB C. Preferably, a detachable USB C cable. I do not mind if the keyboard also has Bluetooth/2.4GHz. That will not be a problem if it has the feature, I will just almost certainly never use it. With that said, not needing a battery generally has a list of pros (smaller, lighter, cheaper, etc.).
    • Ortholinear. The big thing that I am trying to get away from here with my current keyboard is its staggered key layout.
    • Swappable caps. I want to be able to have this keyboard clearly labelled in Colemak layout.
    • VIA compatible. At the very least, I should be able to reprogram keys somehow. QMK, ZMK, whatever.

    Can you think of any suggestions of a good keyboard that fits these requirements? I came across a few that seem like they might fit:

    Kinesis Advantage2

    $399

    https://kinesis-ergo.com/keyboards/advantage2-keyboard/

    Truly Ergonomic CLEAVE

    $299

    https://trulyergonomic.com/mechanical-keyboards/products/cleave-truly-ergonomic-mechanical-switch-keyboard/

    Hazel Cut Slope

    https://shop.hazel.cc/products/cut-slope

    ErgoHaven Planeta

    https://ergohaven.xyz/shop/tproduct/339856256-880659810681-planeta

     

    The series ran from 2016-2018, but I had never even heard of it until after it ended. It was well-written and full of absurd humor akin to Police Squad!, The Naked Gun, Airplane!, etc. It was created by the lead/star of the Office, was led/starred by another the Office actor, and had countless other celebrity guest stars throughout. Any time I see the series mentioned, it is being praised. So, why was it not more popular during its initial run? Wrong network?

    view more: ‹ prev next ›