How does this deleted fix_everything.sh fit in to your story?

https://github.com/whispem/minikv/commit/6e01d29365f345283ec...

I don't see the problem to be honest

Yep, but importantly "pigeon" and "dove" are not exactly interchangeable words, there is just no consensus for which is which.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbidae

Toads and frogs are another pair like this, where there is no clear distinction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog

Also, many tunnels. Less fumes makes a difference.

Is it now officially "eternal sloptember"?

I like how it fluently replies in Spanish to another bot that replied in Spanish.

Try Windy.com, it's got ECMWF data, among others.

People absolutely do give up their athletic career to start a normal career for better financial security.

How many of these normal careers pay a single paycheck of $100k that can't be cashed for twenty years? That's what this offer is.

I don't think you should think of it as a paycheck.

Delaying a normal career to compete in the olympics will set your career and earning potential back by a few years. This money tries to balance it out a bit.

The stated goal is that the money will help people do better in the Olympics. I don't see how it will do that. It might be good to do, but it won't help people perform better.

> The stated goal is that the money will help people do better in the Olympics.

Are you sure? It's not contingent on metals or anything.

https://www.usopc.org/news/2025/march/04/united-states-olymp...

Your link includes this quote from Stevens:

> "The Olympic and Paralympic Games are the ultimate symbol of human excellence. I do not believe that financial insecurity should stop our nation's elite athletes from breaking through to new frontiers of excellence,” said Stevens.

And furthermore:

> By providing financial support for athletes so they can continue competing and by increasing that support for each Games in which they compete, the Stevens Awards will dramatically increase the likelihood that athletes will continue competing, and winning, for America.

And now that they're getting $100k in a few decades they still will

This is one of the reasons I use polars.

You are not wrong, but for this example you can do something like this to run in threads:

  import polars as pl
  
  pl.DataFrame({"a": [1, 2, 3]}).write_parquet("test.parquet")
  
  
  def print_shape(df: pl.DataFrame) -> pl.DataFrame:
      print(df.shape)
      return df
  
  
  lazy_frames = [
      pl.scan_parquet("test.parquet")
      .map_batches(print_shape)
      for _ in range(100)
  ]
  pl.collect_all(lazy_frames, comm_subplan_elim=False)

(comm_subplan_elim is important)

Luckily, polars has .to_pandas() so you can still pass pandas dataframes to the libraries that really are still stuck on that interface.

I maintain one of those libraries and everything is polars internally.

> pandas dataframes

Didn't Pandas move to Arrow, matching Polars, in version 2?

to_pandas has a dependency on pandas - it is not the biggest of deals, but worth keeping in mind.