Under the leaderboard tab, if the "Solution" column has an icon, it's clickable. 2nd place solution is by Jeremy Howard (of fast.ai fame), which I'd summarize as TrueSkill Through Time (Microsoft Research paper) + some overfitting on the public leaderboard (1st place was #26 in the public leaderboard).
They are asking whether the distribution of the direction of rotation of all rotating celestial bodies is equally distributed, for this it is irrelevant which direction of rotation is designated and how.
Fanfiction.net is trivial... apart from it having Cloudflare bot blocking turned up to aggressive levels. I've not seen an approach that works, other than using headless browsers to fetch the content.
The issue is most likely cloudflare blocking most the best scraping methods. If the site can be pulled down with eg. wget or curl without a bunch of options that you definitely aren't writing by hand, pandoc can just be used to directly make an epub.
Corporate liability insurance in the US, which is also a very common thing to get, often does not cover your defense against "intentional torts" such as defamation or fraud. It usually covers things like slips and falls, product-related liability, etc. I would be surprised if your German version covers defamation.
I live next door and have some legal insurance, but you need to pay attention to what coverage you get, because you need to select what categories you want coverage for; vehicles (e.g. if someone who caused an accident refuses to cooperate with you), consumer/housing disputes, work and salary, taxes / stocks, family issues like inheritances, second homes / real estate, etc etc etc. And of course, you can't take out insurance for an ongoing issue, it doesn't cover criminal cases (when you did a bad), business cases, etc.
Germany also regulates legal fees, so self-insurance is quite reasonable. I've now been involved in two cases (once as plaintiff, once as defendant) and it seems the amount I paid is approximately the same as I would have paid in legal insurance.
However, because I'm writing a methods-focused review -- we only look at RCTs meeting certain (pretty minimal) criteria relating to statistical power and measurement validity -- what I'm doing is closer to a combination of review of previous reviews (there have been dozens in my field) and a snowball search (searching bibliographies of papers that are relevant). I also consulted with experts in the field. however, finding bachelor's theses has been challenging, but many are actually relevant, so undermind was helpful there.
Not OP and I don't know if that would be feasible for you, but a Pro feature could be something like https://asreview.nl to determine importance/relevance?
This is really interesting, do you have other recommendations for improvements (gladly with sources I you have any)? I have to build a RAG solution for my job and right now I am collecting information to determine the best way to go ahead.
I'm exploring tooling for building these graphs and would love to pick your brain about your use case, if you're willing. No pressure! wade at tractorbeam dot ai
