Either:
Pick one and I hope whatever you pick works for both of you. Agreement is easy, but teasing can be fun.
The mere fact that we’re answering your question provides sufficient context to clarify the group’s intentions, no?
Yes, but that’s why there is a sidebar.
If you are dissatisfied with the free thing I gave you, then I am happy to send you a refund of your purchase price. 🤷♂️
That’s my preferred strategy.
UPDATE: Before any angry cards and letters, let me clarify. When I reply this way, I learn a lot about the person I’m talking to, including whether they are prepared to have a reasonable conversation about this complex matter. The response I’m hoping for is “Well played.”, because that tells me that they recognize how ridiculous we are both being. I can work with them.
If they are merely having a tough time and needed to vent, then they’ll notice that and we can move forward.
If they are truly that entitled, then I don’t mind what happens next, because they would probably never have accepted any help I could offer them, anyway.
By that part, I was referring to the people establishing the Julian Calendar, not the Gregorian. I’ve edited my comment to clarify that.
Don’t assume you know what is going through their mind, if you want to neutral and polite.
“I believe I’m fulfilling the duties of the job. What am I failing to get done?”
Focus on the requirements of the job and the fact that you’re meeting them.
It wouldn’t surprise me. I’m not sure it could possibly matter to us either way. Presumably we couldn’t break out of the simulation even if we knew about it conclusively. It would be interesting, but practically irrelevant.
Years exist. We decide what to call them. You and I agree to call this year 2024, but that’s only an agreement. Some people call this year 5784.
We call the system we use “The Gregorian Calendar”, because of a Pope named Gregory. That system is mostly the same as “The Julian Calendar”, with some important changes to make the calendar match the changing of the seasons better. In the Julian calendar, they decided to count the years starting from when they thought Jesus was born. They chose his birth year to be “The first year of our Lord”. We call that “year 1” for short.
The people who created that system (the Julian Calendar) didn’t understand 0. The year before “The first year of our Lord” was called “The first year before the birth of Christ”. We now call these “AD 1” (“anno domini”, because Latin) and “1 BC” (“before Christ”). Since they didn’t understand 0, they didn’t call any year “0”. We have kept the tradition, because reasons.
Some other systems have relabeled the year before “AD 1” as year 0, but that’s not how the Gregorian Calendar works, and that’s the calendar that you and I have been taught to use.
Computers don’t directly understand the code that humans write. Humans find it extremely difficult to directly write the code that computers understand.
Compiling is how we convert the code that humans write into the code that computers can run. (It’s more complicated than that, but that explanation is probably enough for now.)
Different computers understand different flavors of computer code. Each kind of computer can compile the same human code, but they produce the flavor of computer code specific to that kind of computer. That’s why you sometimes need to compile the human code on your computer: it’s easier for your computer to know how to compile human code than for a human to know how to compile human code for every kind of computer that exists now and might exist in the future. There are some common kinds of computer and many projects pre-compile human code so that you don’t have to, but that’s not always easy. Also, some people insist on compiling the code themself, rather than trust someone else to correctly compile the code for their computer.
As for how to compile, that can be complicated. When you find the human code (“source code”) for a software project, the README often gives you instructions for how to compile that project’s code. Many of the instructions look familiar, because they are similar between projects, but the detail can vary a lot from project to project. Moreover, different human programming languages have very different instructions for how to compile their flavor of human code into computer code.
I don’t have any useful advice on your specific question. I’m replying to say only two things.
You’re probably going to struggle with this and you might feel like you’re doing it wrong because you can’t figure it out easily enough. Let it feel weird. Let it take as long as it takes. Let it be a struggle. Don’t make it worse by telling yourself a story like there’s something wrong with you because you’re struggling to figure it out.
And hug.
Peace.
Not my favorite, but my favorite to recommend to people: Special Bulletin. And Without Warning is a close second.
This works very well for me. It certainly helped me get past the notion that I needed motivation before doing something.
I prefer to want to do a thing before doing it, but I don’t have to.
What does cheating mean in this context? What did they have access to that you wish they hadn’t? And if that’s the case, then why did you make this a take home exam?
I think about burnout simply: if resting no longer leads to recovery, then you’re burned out.
Peace. Good luck.
“B if and only if A” is a shorthand way to write “B if A and B only if A”. It’s like how “He is young and thin” means “He is young and he is thin”. We could write it the second way without trouble, but the first way is shorter, we agree that they mean the same thing, and we prefer to conserve energy when writing.
The form “if and only if” is merely a convenient shorthand. Shorthand is usually more convenient for the writer than for the reader. 🤷♂️
Imagine these natural language sentences and analyze how they are different:
Hint: what do you do in each case when it’s snowing?
No.
B iff A is defined as “If B then A and if A then B”.
If that doesn’t make it clear enough for you, then try writing out the truth table for both statements.
Enjoy! “I’ve chosen to find it charming.”