> Were they worth it, those childbirth photographs? Did they turn out well? One did. Only one
Three angles:
A - For that one picture that's worth you might need to take a dozen.
Or sometimes 60 in burst mode. Liking to take photos in the first place makes it a different exercise and one might spend more effort and be more critical of that one good photo, but I'd assume people not that into photo will also need more sample to find the ones they really like.
B - You only know which one turns out well after the fact. I'd push it further: if you want to live in the moment and not be pixel peeping next to your newborn, you better not care too much about the result and just snap at every chance, especially as you won't be handling you camera while holding your kid.
And that's the same for every occasion. Just snapping a bunch of pictures when it's less distracting is to me the best strategy yet.
C - Unsurprisingly the pictures I absolutely loved weren't the same as my kid's for instance. A decade later he actually looked at his birth photo, and stopped for almost a minute at each one of them, and the one that hit him the most wasn't his. but a random shot of his mother looking at him. I'd feel so sorry if I didn't take that shot, it was horribly framed and totally unthought, but that's the one that hit him. Btw I'm in almost none of these shots, didn't think of it and wouldn't have cared to at the time.
When my first child was born we hired a doula to help everything go smoothly and one of the services she offered was to take a few photos of the process so I could stay present with my partner. It was great not having to worry about this and she managed to catch several fantastic shots.
For the second child we had a different doula, but requested her to do the same. Unfortunately that doula was at lunch when the birth happened and missed the whole thing. I managed to get a couple pictures taken with my cell phone but they ended up pretty garbage.
I admit I just went and peeked, but honestly we don't ever look at either of these sets. The newborn photos we really cherish in both cases are the ones that were taken in the hospital the next morning after everyone had gotten a little rest.
On reviewing students' work: people exchange copies, get their hands on past similar assignments, get friends to do their homework , potentially each of them shadow the other in fields they're good at etc.
There always was a bunch of realistic options to not actually do your submitted work, and AI is merely makes it easier, more detectable and more scalable.
I think it moves the needle from 40 to 75, which is not great, but you'd already be holding your nose at student work half of the time before AI, so teaching had to be about more than that (and TBH it was, when I was in school teachers gave no fuck about submitted work if they didn't validate it by some additional face to face or test time)
I'd push back on this: I wouldn't share something I haven't checked, yet my natural writing style is nothing like Gemini, so having a whole paragraph in a different style in my mail requires a disclaimer (I don't want people double guessing what I'm quoting or if I had some different intent writing that paragraph)
Rewriting it in my own words would clear the issue, but then why am I even using an AI in the first place ?
TBF no framework will do everything perfectly, and having clean escape hatches is pretty good in itself.
Even outside of batch processing, there will usually be a few queries that absolutely benefit from being rewritten in a lower layer of the ORM or even plain SQL. It's just a fact of life.
> ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of GraphQL.
Everytime I hit the "should we use GraphQL" question in the last decade we balked because we already had fast REST like APIs and couldn't see a how it would get faster.
To your point it was more of a mish-mash than anything with a central library magically dealing with the requests, so there is more cognitive load, but it also meant we had much more control over the behavior and performance profile.
Reading from the comments here I was expecting at lot more meat about the case, but it's just a report on anonymous reports and what the husband allegedly told to the press ?
Otherwise, does a divorce really need anything more than one party willing to get out of the relationship ?
Even assuming anyone is calling it quits on frivolous grounds, it also means that's how much emotional investment there was left in the first place and they were due for a break any day really.
> Otherwise, does a divorce really need anything more than one party willing to get out of the relationship?
I don't know anything about Greek statutes specifically, but no-fault divorce has actually been a relatively recent development in most legal jurisdictions.
Greece has no-fault (consensual) divorces. It looks like the only strong requirements are having a lawyer oversee the process and both parties agreeing to the conditions.
Divorce is a legal procedure to dissolve a legal union; local rules vary, but while it can be accomplished without standing in court, in the US at least the terms of the dissolution must still be documented and--even if signed by both parties--approved by a judge. One of the most notable pieces of the divorce is the division of the union's assets, which especially in a "no fault" divorce must be "fair" to both parties since neither one is accusing the other of wrongdoing.
_In general_ (I am not a lawyer, I don't know your situation or laws of your area), anything acquired during the marriage is joint property. That can include every paycheck you receive in the span of the marriage, even if the salary is established before marriage, deposited in a personal account, and you were the only one working the entire time.
And that means everything you pay for with that money is also jointly owned, including any mortgage payments using those joint funds. Therefore your (to be ex-)spouse may have stake in any property you own that must be fairly divided. If you bought the house after getting married this may at least be a simple 50/50 split, but if one of you put your whole pre-marriage savings as the down payment you can bet this gets a lot messier.
Speaking of money, if you're making 100K and your spouse makes 50K the union has 150K to sustain a standard of living. After the divorce neither party will be able to keep that same standard of living of course, but one party is more greatly affected than the other. In a "no fault" divorce the outcome must be "fair" to both parties.
But WTF does that even mean? Is it "fair" to have to pay your ex-spouse for being less successful in their career? According to the courts the answer may be, "Yes," especially for any income gained (or lost) during the marriage because, "Pursuing a new job is something you decided _together_, right?"
All that is to say that even if both parties agree that holding onto a failing relationship isn't to anyone's benefit, divorce is something else that either (or both) might not find so agreeable.
When my ex-wife asked for a divorce, I wasn't going to fight over what had already felt by that point a completely one-sided relationship. That helped a lot getting over the emotional shock of the situation, and we did manage a pretty amicable no fault divorce. But it was still was months of debating how much she should get from the two years paid into our 30 year mortgage, and ended with both of us being worse off financially for several more years.
Divorce is not just a break up that you state your waning interest and walk away from; it is a complicated legal process that will force some uncomfortable conversations about things you probably would have never imagined being an issue while you believed the relationship was going well.
Which is not to say you shouldn't do it if your relationship is bad, but if you think your relationship is bound to end on some frivolous grounds you either shouldn't get married in the first place or find relationship help immediately.
I'll be showing my utter lack of romanticism, but I think any long lasting relationship (marriage or not) is on the same boat, the only difference will be how the couple discusses these issues, and whether they have a leg to stand on when shit hits the fan or they're just SOL.
Imagine being in a non-married relationship and taking a mortgage for a house you'll both live in and potentially both pay. You'll still need to have these uncomfortable discussions, probably upfront and not when it goes south. Same if you have a kid, if one quits their job to take care of that kid (or take care of the other if needed).
A marriage will package a defined set of rules to apply to these situations, where not being married will force a lot of case-by-case examination, with probably one end of the relation getting shafted. Some countries (Japan is one, there must be others) have a "not married but could as well be" status for these kind of situations.
What I'm saying is, being in a marriage or not is akin to having a contract or not. It doesn't change what you're supposed to be doing, it will only help to frame the discussion in the dire times. By the same token, breaking up a long lasting relationship shouldn't be about whether the paperwork is a PITA or not, not being in a marriage doesn't make it OK to just screw the other side for instance, hopefully you'll still have the uncomfortable discussions either way.
Sorry, that's the point I was making to which I may have got off track. Marriage can't be ended by one party "calling it quits on frivolous grounds" because its a legal contract between two people.
Both parties must come to an agreement about how to break the contract, including conditions they may or may not have realized they agreed to, otherwise the must demonstrate how one has already broken the contract.
If you want a relationship you can just walk away from, or believe your parter does, you should not get married.
60B is half of what pharma companies allegedly sent back to their shareholders from insulin price hikes. There's better places to direct anger towards overspent money IMHO. At least some people are happy with their Quest 2/3.
> Novo Nordisk and Sanofi have seen huge gains as the list price of insulin has grown. The companies have collectively distributed a total of $122 billion to shareholders in the form of share buybacks and cash dividends over the period 2009-2018.
The main issue could be that everyone's clamouring for a new smartphone moment, when no technology needs to be that.
VR can live on alongside tablets and desktop computers and be a healthy nichey market. It doesn't need to take the world by storm and there is IMHO no need for it to replace Zoom calls (to be honest, Zoom calls are already the bane of our life, why would I want to pay to do them in even more constraining ways ?)
Trying to find the "next big thing" in absolutely everything is a curse.
Three angles:
A - For that one picture that's worth you might need to take a dozen.
Or sometimes 60 in burst mode. Liking to take photos in the first place makes it a different exercise and one might spend more effort and be more critical of that one good photo, but I'd assume people not that into photo will also need more sample to find the ones they really like.
B - You only know which one turns out well after the fact. I'd push it further: if you want to live in the moment and not be pixel peeping next to your newborn, you better not care too much about the result and just snap at every chance, especially as you won't be handling you camera while holding your kid.
And that's the same for every occasion. Just snapping a bunch of pictures when it's less distracting is to me the best strategy yet.
C - Unsurprisingly the pictures I absolutely loved weren't the same as my kid's for instance. A decade later he actually looked at his birth photo, and stopped for almost a minute at each one of them, and the one that hit him the most wasn't his. but a random shot of his mother looking at him. I'd feel so sorry if I didn't take that shot, it was horribly framed and totally unthought, but that's the one that hit him. Btw I'm in almost none of these shots, didn't think of it and wouldn't have cared to at the time.
reply