The IEEE standard actually does not dictate a rounding policy
KRAW
I guess your battery isn't overheating?
I personally recommend Multi Launcher, which is KISS with just a few more features that stay out of your way if you don't want them
In Columbus, you would be considered just a normal guy. You could easily find a community there.
Cleaning also takes less time, especially if you include all the planning that goes into cooking. Then if you consider the amount of time it'd take for the same meal to be made by other members of the household, you start to see that cleaning is actually a bargain. You also have to remember that even when you enjoy cooking, it is stil exhausting. They have less energy to clean than those who didn't cook.
Obviously there is a limit. If the cook is making an excessive mess due to doing some particularly fancy cooking out of ambition, they should probably help out. But if you regularly reap the benefits of someone else's skill in the kitchen, yes, you should help clean.
Oh, I'm aware of the irony of reviewing this as an adult male, haha.
The idea was solid, but execution was poor. Super fast pacing, storyline is very predictable and basically all development of the characters is told not shown. They basically choose to have the main conflict be magically resolved instead of writing a resolution. What really shines is the animation. The humor is pretty solid too. There's a better version of this movie, but it's not the version we got.
The amount of CPU time compiling code is usually negligible compared to CPU time at runtime. Your comparison only really works if you are comparing against something like Rust, where less bugs are introduced due to certain guarantees by the language.
Regarding "language constructs" it really depends on what you mean. For example using numpy in python is kind of cheating because numpy is implemented in C. However using something like the algorithm libraries in Rust woulf be considered fair game since they are likely written in Rust itself.
Addiction was simply an example of why a homeless person might not be able to handle money reponsibly. It was not an assumption about what made them homeless, nor was it a judgement on their character. I don't disagree with anything your saying, so I don't see the problem. And I don't refuse giving any aid. I just think giving to an organization is more likely to help a person than giving to them directly. Maybe if I was handing out in volumes of $1k it'd be enough to change soneone's like, but obvioualy most can't afford to do that.
Acknowledging crippling dependence != judgement
Do you know how addiction works?
I am not responding to all this but I cannot let this slide:
So this is another disengenous oversimplification. You will take the position that a homeless person can sustain a hard drug addiction from panhandling, yet they would not be able to afford a motel room for the night, or an extended stay, and begin their climb back into society. This is purely a moral judgement on your part.
You acknowledge that dependence is a need (which I agree with!) but you think that an addict will magically overcome their addiction when handed the money they could use to sustain the addiction? The justification you're using for handing them money (i.e. relieving withdrawal) is the same reason I don't expect an addict to buy a night at the motel over their drugs. The reasons are biological not moral. You must be operating on another definition of moral or something.
I think the real reason you haven't dated a girl is you've never gotten to know any. You wouldn't think like this otherwise. A majority of couples I know have equal relationships with emotionally vulnerable guys. Your last statement on touching grass fits the bill.