Yes, the first one matches only 2 more characters while the second matches 1 or more. Also the +? is a lazy quantifier so it will consume as little as possible.

They are using nitrogen gas, generated from liquid nitrogen.

fsck almost certainly isn’t going to cause loss of data, but it will likely inform you about a loss that already occurred if that is the issue you are having.

I would still say that getting people to the point where they can write safe C code every time is harder than learning Rust, as it’s equivalent to being able to write rust code that compiles without any safety issues (compiler errors) every single time, which is very difficult to do.

That isn’t included the percentage that didn’t change, because they aren’t interested in picking up and leaving the country just because they don’t like the government.

Not really, that theorem says there are true things that cannot be proven, whereas this question is more about running out of proofs that you can make.

How are you having to scroll two page lengths?

Historically it is a term used positively, for example in the expression ‘stay woke’ (1930s). So it is not really a reclamation, but rather a recent relegation by right wing people to a negative connotation. I have however heard some people legitimately use it in a positive manner, and some further reading on the Wikipedia page seems to support that even recently there are political leaders using it in a pro-racial equity sense.

@[email protected]

I would use the same definition as you, but that’s the only definition I can think of that would leave one thinking many people engage in animal cruelty. Unless your entire circle of friends is an illegal dogfighting ring.

It just seems very broad since people use it many ways “get woke” vs “the woke mob.” At least in the US it is used by people in both good and bad ways.

It depends on whether you think the existence of livestock is ‘mean to animals.’

Who do you mean by this?

Why do you want to be less reliant on Wikipedia?

At least in the US there are a number of subsidies that help to keep meat prices low, which isn’t really great because it increases demand for one of the more environmentally damaging foods to produce.

This happens to me too.

Some religions believe that they should proselytize as many people as possible, so really not letting them convert you is disrespectful to their beliefs.

I agree that there’s a difference, but I’m not sure a simple argument like this really works since it is difficult to say one belief is ‘better.’

I suppose the US, but it would probably have to involve us paying for moving them to the US from South Korea. Otherwise South Korea could have such a program so that they can become residents with actual rights (or maybe they already do).

Why don’t we have a law for North Korea like the Cuban Adjustment Act that allows anyone who makes it out of the country to quickly become a permanent resident, without regard for how they got out of their country. The situation seems fairly similar, where encouraging more defectors makes the target country look bad, and it can deprive them of workers.

Probably something about how your bank account only earns interest because banks can lend out a fraction of that to make money. Otherwise they would just be like a vault service who you have to pay to keep your money safe (basically negative interest).

While the loan is outstanding the bank would only have $100 ($1000 - $900 loaned out), so when it is repaid they go back to $1000.