>I only know of a single bank using this.

If it's not Crédit Mutuel then you now know of a second bank using this method.

I am interested too, my fallback bank trapped me (or my courage to resist), the fallback of fallback would be crypto but i am not sure i want to depend on this too...

Meanwhile, the last hope is that people will use more cash (if the digital world is too hostile, oh wait it is!)

and at the same time paywalled metadata https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/restore-fully-free-and-o...

This is lame, but always remember that OpenAlex exists and is completely free:

https://openalex.org/works?page=1&filter=primary_location.so...

>if in forall A, B A is of type _i and B is of type _j, forall A, B is of type type *_(max(i, j) + 1).

Minor correction: no +1 in forall

https://generalrobots.substack.com/p/benjies-humanoid-olympi... "Use a key", about halfway down

https://oxcaml.org/documentation/stack-allocation/intro/ ?

When you look at an old version of a wikipedia article it still displays the current version of images. That's why in your link the image legend has eg

>[light green] Countries that have announced their impending recognition of Palestine (Australia, France, Malta, and San Marino)

but Australia is dark green in the current image (France still light green and I can't be bothered zooming to see the small ones)

>Lean is also a lot faster.

What do you base that on? I don't think I've seen a performance comparison but I'm not great at internet searches.

Since 2 is prime 1, wouldn't it be more symmetric if 1 was prime 2?

What makes you think two is prime? Not everyone would agree with that statement as the artical points out.

The article states that historically Nicomachus of Gerasa didn't consider 2 a prime, in like 100 AD.

Nowadays 2 is considered prime. Seems silly to question why someone is claiming 2 is prime if that is how it is defined in modern day.

> What makes you think two is prime

The current mathematical definition of a prime number

> What makes you think two is prime

I will admit that for me it was being brainwashed through years of high school and university mathematics.

No respect for Nicomachus of Gerasa, huh?

Technically yes

This is what I would call const correctness, because it is correct.

>What I really want is to for git to treat each commit as a repository state, so that removing indentation from the state at commit A means that the patch for commit B adds all the indentation

`git rebase -X theirs` seems like it should be close, but commit B will only override conflicting chunks (so a change from A which doesn't conflict with B will persist, this shouldn't be a problem for your use case)