Skillay fillay

I use the exact same method and I've found it turns out steaks better than any steakhouse I've been to.

I'd smash that garlic up a bit (although I like way too much garlic).

I'm not certain of this, but my understanding is that light in a vacuum is unhindered. When it's passing through a medium, it interacts with the medium and either doesn't travel straight, or is absorbed and emitted. Someone correct me if this is wrong.

Or that they were in the same car, the groom's car could have struck the bride's.

That's how my uneducated brain sees it. It's like if all possible outcomes are just probabilities on a bell curve, and we're sat somewhere on top of the bell, but the infinite possibilities stretch out at each end infinitely.

However this bell curve is in 3D space and might be better thought of as a gradual blurring, as more possibilities spread out from a single fixed point of observation.

> but I'm not much of the relationship type

No clue why Tinder didn't work...

Well thought out argument, well done

They do it just as much as Apple do, it seems common to Apple devices

With identical settings?

They should give comparisons in the article, that's the point.

Are Apple users just fine with this? It seems to happen a lot for Apple products.

Always "30% better" or "twice the performance" but never any actual meaningful numbers.

Prompt yes, anything else, no.

SD version, resolution, passes, channels etc, all massively affect performance.

"I take 25 minutes to drive to work and you take 30 so my car is faster"

You can't compare two different images with different settings

The problem is, stable diffusion isn't a fixed length operation, yes it's 50 iterations but those iterations will vary massively based on the input term, output resolution, channels as well as about 10 other settings.

Wow, that's an amount of time different to the previous calculation machine!

I can forgive them not giving a comparison to other architectures but why don't they give a reference to the timing before the optimisations? 18 seconds in meaningless.

You said "most", but from my experience it's been about 50/50

No, a big proportion still believe this nonsense, even Gordon Ramsay

I think the "flat surface" thing might just be one of those chef wisdoms that actually has no effect, just like using oil in your pasta water.

It really depends what you mean by "better".

Safer? hell no, men tend to be way more dangerous.

Getting out of potentially dangerous situations? Possible.

Driving competitively at a very high level? Yes, men are more prevalent in this, but that doesn't mean that a man will be better than a woman, only that characteristics that lead someone to excel are more likely to be there in men.

> which was 7% of the weight that was advertised

That's way more than I expected

Was gonna say that, do they think that a Phillips driver would turn the head "better" and it would unscrew?