It's more that the english ain't parsing, for some at least.
The mining.com quote is classic weasel phrasing, seemingly meaningful yet disturbingly ambiguous:
Due to rising gold prices, the move helped the bank to generate a capital gain of 13 billion euros ($15 billion), bringing it to a net profit of 8.1 billion euros for the 2025 financial year after a net loss of 7.7 billion euros in 2024.
So, the move helped the bank generate ...
Just as, say, one guy helped four others push a car back up on the road.
We've been given, accurately or not .. likely true, figures on how the bank did over a period, we've also been told the gold movements helped with that ... so they almost certainly kicked in at least $1.
I'm a non-native French speaker, but I am pretty confident that's not true. They are actually different sounds, not just the same sound at a different pitch.
French is not a tonal language like Chinese. Pitch is not used to distinguish between different phonemes.
And ê, when pronounced (most of the cases) it's just a è.
ë, contrary as said in the article (full slop?) is the most complicated and with some exceptions. But there is so few words that use that letter that you just don't have to care.
Just pronounce ë as è when its in (inside) a word and not pronounced at all when it's at the end.
The only exception I can think of is canoë (pronounced conoé), but everybody will understand if you say cano.
Ambiguë (ambiguous) and aiguë (acute) [1], but these are "old" spellings.
For instance, this word "ambiguë" was changed in the 1990 spelling reform to "ambigüe" [2] probably to emphasis the fact that the U is not mute (because for most -gue words it is, like for "fatigue" in french and english).
Like with ï and ü, the tréma mark is precisely the mark of an exception.
My first French teacher drew a picture of a smiling triangular-topped tombstone with long eyelashes on the blackboard, the word "acute" written up the left (ascending) side of the top and "grave" down the right hand side. A cute grave. Easy to remember. And fairly useless, since it doesn't help a whit with how to pronounce those accents.
What if you have two things? You'd then need two buttons.
The push button is a perfectly viable option, it just needs to be in a form factor that's works. Could be as simple as a tiny low-energy Bluetooth board with a coin battery that will last several months.
Yeah, a touch-sensitive com-badge mounted on your chest would work.
Actually, I would think a small coin-sized button & transmitter that did nothing but emit a signal that your assistant (or phone) interprets as 'start listening' would be pretty useful. In your pocket, on a watch band, etc.
It's not uncommon with routable internal networks to only drop inbound SYN,!ACK to disallow inbound connections while permitting outbound ones, since it doesn't require connection tracking (which can be resource intensive).
I can't really imagine why you would do it for NAT'd v4 since you can't avoid the connection tracking overhead, but you certainly could, and I don't doubt OP has run into it in the wild. I've seen much weirder firewall rules :)
What are the obvious reasons? If you're protecting a client system, you don't want to allow in any bare SYNs. (And for that matter, if you're protecting a server, you probably want to discard ill-targeted bare SYNs without consulting conntrack anyway, just as a matter of avoiding extra CPU work.)
Does this mean by establishing a new connection with a SYN,ACK bypasses some firewalls? I expect at least one OS out there ignores the extraneous ACK flag and proceeds to establish a new connection.
All inbound packets are matched against existing sessions. In this case none will turn up, so the packet will go through the "new session" flow and be subject to the same filtering as a bare SYN. Look up how connection tracking works, e.g. in the Linux kernel, it's rather simple and logical.
Looking at all ready-made options on Amazon and elsewhere - anyone who will roll out an adult-oriented well-made single-button camera that takes in standard thermal paper rolls will make a fortune. This is such a great thing to have for get-togethers and parties. But it's essential to not being bound by $X/shot proprietary cartridges and be able to shoot and snap without thinking. Mementos for everyone!
* ... without thinking of costs involved. $2 per polaroid with half of them not even developing properly is a bit too high for spontaneous photography urges.
reply