I just read this article about Schlemiel the Painter and string concatenation.
But I'm struggling to understand the connection.
Schlemiel gets fewer and fewer dots painted because he is constantly having to go back to his paint can, which was left where he started, to get more paint on his brush.
When concatenating strings using something like:
string a = "a";
for(int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
a += "a";
}
It will create a new string each time, copying in the original string and the new "a".
But when Schlemiel paints the dots, each dot is further away from the can, however each string concatenation is just copying two strings into a new string, which should taken the same amount of time regardless of how long the strings are, right?
Or do I have a misunderstanding of the time required to concatenate larger and larger strings?
Hasenpfeffer Incorporated!
We're gonna make it...
by beating the bucks senseless in Milwaukee.
& yeah if you get the reference you're as old as dirt too. props to my bro for reminding me.
Taking a few at a time. Comment your favorite food for dodo :)
Game 1: Milwaukee Bucks vs Houston Rockets - Are you sure it's not still preseason?? AKA Not a lot of highlights.
| STARTERS | BENCH |
|---|---|
| Lonzo Ball (8 PTS on 2/7 FGM, 5 REB, 5 AST, 1 TO) | Kendrick Nunn (25 PTS on 10/18, 3 AST, 2 STL) |
| Delon Wright (5 PTS on 1/2 FGM, 3 AST, 1 STL) | Terence Davis |
| Aaron Gordon (9 PTS on 2/8 FGM, 3 AST, 2 STL, 1 BLK) | Glenn Robinson (13 PTS on 5/10 FGM, 5 REB) |
| Danilo Gallinari (21 PTS on 7/13, 2 3PTM, 7 REB) | Kelly Olynyk (7 PTS, 1 3PTM, 8 REB, 1 STL, 2 BLK) |
| Montrezl Harrell (17 Points on 7/11, 7 REB, 1 STL, 1 BLK) | Mohamed Bamba (7 PTS, 1 3PTM, 7 REB) |
Back of the bench: Terance Mann, Isaac Bonga, Goga Bitadze, Jarred Vanderbilt
vs.
| STARTERS | BENCH |
|---|---|
| Monte Morris (6 PTS on 2/6 FGM, 3 AST) | Garrett Temple (4 PTS, 2 STL) |
| James Harden (19 PTS on 2/13 FGM, 14/14 FTM, 14 AST | Aaron Holiday |
| Lebron James (18 PTS on 7/19 FGM, 9 REB, 8 AST) | Michael Kidd-Gilchrist |
| Joe Ingles (7 PTS, 1 3PTM, 3 REB, 4 AST) | Pat Connaughton (10 PTS on 4/8 FGM, 2 3PTM, 4 REB) |
| DeAndre Jordan (2 PTS, 3 REB, 4 FOULS) | ??? |
DNP-INJ: Andre Roberson
Did the good guys win?
Yes? Combined 9-32 shooting by James and James. While the Bucks can’t have been said to win either match-up (Lebron nearly triple-doubled, Harden went a perfect 14-14 from the line with 14 assists) strong defensive efforts by Gordon, Wright and - for some stretches - Lonzo kept either from scorching the earth which was probably necessary given:
16 largely ineffective minutes by starting center DeAndre Jordan (2 Points, 3 Rebounds, 0 Blocks, 4 Fouls) in which he could neither deal with forced-into-the-starting role Montrezl Harrell around the basket or step out on eventual-starter Kelly Olynyk.
...Which meant the Rockets had to go very small (too small?) with some combination of James, Ingles, Pat Connaughton (Houston's only other scorer in double digits. Uh oh.) and MKG in the front court. That may explain why the Rooster got loose for 21.
... and Kendrick Nunn LED ALL SCORERS!?! Out-of-nowhere with an efficient 25 off the bench. Safe to say Monte Morris (6 points, 3 Assists) and Aaron Holiday (Less than that!?) were demoralized.
No? It took everything Gordon, Wright, and Ball had to slow Houston’s two superstars. They combined for fewer points (AG: 9, Lonzo: 8, Wright: 5) than Milwaukee’s G-Leaguer extraordinaire alone. The trio didn’t miss a lot of shots but settling for only what the defense gives them clearly isn’t going to win often. Particularly given that the
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Abraham, Kierkegaard and Kafka
We want to be the hero, but we can so easily end up the schlemiel.
Abraham felt compelled to sacrifice his son to God. He knew the absurdity of the situation and the demand it made on him as his loyalty to God but he was prepared to do it. He proves his faith in this excessive act. Or at least that is Kierkegaard's take on it.
But was the fear greater than the loss of his son and the absurdity of the act. Kafka has an alternate view:
> True faith is not lacking in him, he has this faith; he would make the sacrifice in the right spirit if only he could believe he was the one meant. He is afraid that after starting out as Abraham with his son he would soon change on the way into Don Quixote. The world would have been enraged at Abraham could it have beheld him at this time, but this one is afraid that the world would laugh itself to death at the sight of him.
You intend to be the hero, but become the hero/fool knight. Society rarely gives you the answer. There is no Other of the Other.
> The mysteries of the Egyptians were mysteries for the Egyptians themselves.
Christine Blasey Ford
Christine Blasey Ford was haunted that her enjoyment had been stolen. They had "fun at my expense". They laughed at her. They laughed among themselves during the sexual act. That was the crime.
“I was underneath one of them [Kavanaugh] while the two [Kavanaugh and Judge] laughed. Two friends having a really good time with one another.”
“Can you tell us what you don’t forget about that night?”
"...The laughter, the uproarious laughter..."
And with the hearing, she, like Abraham, risked being made a fool of a second time. She is asked to step up to prove herself but will she end up as the schlemiel again?
In the moments in the hearing, she noticeably lit up with narcissistic pleasure as she was praised as a hero. But on close questioning she looked glum. The whole thing must feel bizarre to her.
To be asked about the deeply personal fantastical traumatic core at the heart of her life must be uncanny. But then to have her fantasy taken as the American fantasy of modern America for at least a decade to come must be truly wacky.
In Genesis, Sarah laughs at Abraham. Surely, Chris
... keep reading on reddit ➡I know it's a massively random thing, but my Google Home just doesn't get Schlemiel. It just doesn't understand it. It's become a running gag in our house to ask Google Home about the word. It's like asking it to tell you something random. We've tried at least a hundred times. We've even tried looking up the word on our phone and having it be pronounced by Google itself.
It's also not like it'll give you the definition to words that sound like it. It will just give you something completely random. "Hey Google, what's a Schlemiel?"
"On the Wikipedia page for airborne diseases, it says that herpes can be spread by helicoptering."
Just thought to share this interesting fact.
Since reading Pioneers: The First Breach (particularly the edition's introduction talking about the main character's archetypes, maskil and schlemiel, being common in Yiddish literature), I've been thinking about the personalities and appeals we expect in our protagonists and heroes. To quote a scholarly analysis, the Yiddish lead, in contrast to the moralistic leaders of American literature and the saintly fools of the Russian literature that shared geography with Yiddish, "is vulnerable and inept. The schlemiel is neither saintly nor pure, but only weak. The sleight of hand of his comedy is intended to persuade us that this weakness is strength"
Overall, the main character of Pioneers is controlled mostly by his surroundings and his own petty mistakes, letting himself be squeezed between the suspicious religious leadership of the town he's trying to work as a Russian tutor in (despite having a poor grasp of Russian) and the Russian authorities he suspects he'll need the protection of (and who expect his to follow modern and secular practices like eating pork, reading the Christian bible, and getting baptized), and suspect such a story would be savaged on the American market.
