Not just the best tho, I got it too

I doubt working class people spent their evenings reading high-brow books. Magazines, cheaper novels, things that don't demand much mental investment after 8+ hours of work have drained your energy and left a little for chores.

Families that could live on a single income may have had more time, but if that has reduced, it may well because a single income often can't sustain a whole family any more.

TV didn't magically create a need for mindless entertainment. It may have supplanted other recreational activities, but it couldn't replace e.g. meeting up for a drink and a nice chat unless the convenience of it outweighed the loss of social activity.

Also ich bin ja froh, dass es das Internet gibt mit all seinen Vorzügen. Ich kann das Maß an sozialem Austausch hier viel besser regulieren und meinen Nerven anpassen als ich das in der Auslinie-Welt könnte.

Aber manche Menschen sollten einfach kein Sprachrohr für ihre Scheiße kriegen

"The same difficult fight twice"

If only it were the same fight. OOP is going to have quite the fun time for sure.

Also, yeah, it immediately appearing over there is a nasty pitfall. I understand the logic of it, but maybe he shouldn't move there until you gathered all the ingredients. For newer players in particular, that fight can be a brutal challenge.

I know you're memeing, but if I know my Lisp, just wrapping something in triple parens implies evaluating it three times. So you have an expression evaluating to a producer that produces another producer that finally produces a value?

I'm sure there's a legit use case for it. I just can't think of one.

And what range can that sum cover?

Pretty sure "People who know enough about SQL to know about variables" is a subset of "People who know enough about SQL to be pedantic about it" :p

Cognitive disabilities are a thing. Accommodating for them would be a good thing.

Not that that's the intended purpose of that AI, probably, but if it can simplify the form without twisting the content*, it could be a great tool to make complex works more approachable. It's not necessarily a question of "can they understand it" as much as "can they be arsed to read it". I know plenty of people that just straight up didn't read one of the books relevant for our finals and just skirted through with guides laying out the things you were supposed to know. The book wasn't necessarily impossible to understand, but so tedious to dig into they just couldn't muster the motivation.

I don't know how many books worth reading for their point remain unread by people who didn't find the wrapping around that point appealing. Simplification may help them, even if it butchers the artful use of language others enjoy.

*The issue I'm concerned about is that the content may be inadvertently twisted in the process of being parsed and rephrased by an AI with no actual sense for the semantics. Who would notice? Would you have someone proof-read it? What about repeat queries of the same book? Would you assemble a library of simplified books?

At that point you might as well make manually supervised "translations" into simpler language that take care to preserve the point, can be written once and revised when language shifts. You'd still get the benefits, but also be less dependent on an AI doing a good job.

What is 4d as a numeric format prefix? I only know 0b and 0x. Is it some 4-24 system?

I sure wouldn't want him as an INNER JOIN

That's (part of) why it should be a separate table to map the relation "Relationship". People can have more than one (polyamory, infidelity), and you could track fields like the start, end, status (e.g. flirting, dating, committed, engaged, married, ended) in there.

Good point.

Should be age > (@my_age / 2) +7

FTFOP - now my age is some value defined outside the immediate query.

More likely, the GIRLS would be a view of some table persons and you could query my_age from that table too.