• 23 Posts
  • 1.49K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • barsoap@lemm.eetomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    They might use standard imagemagick or such on the backend meaning they can ingest pretty much any image format ever invented, and have a limited set of extensions allowed on the frontend side so people don’t upload .txts.


  • barsoap@lemm.eetomemes@lemmy.worldgoddamnit
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    This grant does not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of these implementations.

    IANAL but what they’re saying here seems to be “if you download our code and modify it and, with that modification, touch some other patent of ours we can still have your ass”. That is, the license they’re giving out only cover the code that they release. Which shouldn’t be too controversial, I think.

    The issue with codecs in general is that there’s plenty of trolls around and coming up with any audio or video codec is probably going to hit one of their patents, so the best that FLOSS codecs can do is “we don’t have any patents on this” or “we do have patents on this but license them freely, also, if someone else goes after you we’re going to detonate a patent minefield under their ass”. Patent portfolios have essentially reached the level of MAD.

    Personally, IDGAF: Software patents aren’t a thing over here. You only have to worry about that stuff if you’re developing silicon.


  • 0.999… has no smallest digit, thus the carry operation fails to roll it over to 1.

    That’s where limits get involved, snatching the carry from the brink of infinity. You could, OTOH, also ignore that and simply accept that it has to be the case because 0.333… * 3. And let me emphasise this doubly and triply: That is a correct mathematical understanding. You don’t need to get limits involved. It doesn’t make it any more correct, or detailed, or anything. Glancing at Occam’s razor, it’s even the preferable explanation: There’s a gazillion overcomplicated and egg-headed ways to write 1 + 1 = 2 (just have a look at the Principia Mathematica), that doesn’t mean that a kindergarten student doesn’t understand the concept correctly. Begone, superfluous sophistication!

    (I just noticed that sophistication actually shares a root with sophistry. What a coincidence)

    Someone using only basic arithmetic on decimal notation will conclude that 0.999… is not 1.

    Doesn’t pass scrutiny, because then either 0.333… /= 1/3 or 3 /= 3 (or both). It simply cannot be the case when looking at the whole system, as opposed to only the single question 0.999… ?= 1 and trying to glean something from that. Context matters: Any answer to that question has to be consistent with all the rest you know about the natural numbers. And only 0.999… = 1 fulfils that.

    Why are you making this so complicated?




  • The majority of my casual partners have explicitly requested, or discussed how attractive they find, borderline abusive behavior: physical aggression, jealousy, catcalling and infantalizing language, relentless pursuit, etc.

    What they say they want is usually not what they want. Let me take your examples apart:

    physical aggression,

    The actually attractive thing is being able to hold your own, and be self-directed. Anger and aggression are a pale imitation of that preferred by some women because they’ve never seen anything off the doormat - douchebag axis. Or, differently put: You can’t be peaceful while being harmless. If she prefers a bit of a thrill loom there like a rollercoaster handing out tickles if you dare to get on.

    jealousy,

    Is a pale imitation of loyalty. It’s what passes as attachment in lieu of meaningful connection, as relationship security in lieu of figuring out what both of you want from your own and the other’s life.

    catcalling

    Yes she wants to be considered attractive. She likes compliments. We all do… at least from the right people, in the right situation, for a thing we want to be complimented for. The trick is to be able to mind-read :)

    and infantalizing language,

    That’s about being cared for, having space to not have to care about things, space to stop adulting. If she generally fails at adulting that’s a red flag, if she has her shit together, heck, why not, I can make pancakes with happy faces on them.

    relentless pursuit, etc.

    See jealousy. Basically the same mechanism.


  • barsoap@lemm.eetoComic Strips@lemmy.worldthings you can only do with boys
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    I think there’s a couple of people around with collective OCD that just can’t stand metaphor.


    Jokes aside, and not being a sociologist, I do think it’s a good distinction because PTSD implies a maladaptive reaction to trauma, and communities, just like individuals, can process their trauma well or they can mess it up.


  • barsoap@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzI just cited myself.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I get that ever model is wrong, but some are useful.

    There is nothing wrong about decimal notation. It is correct. There’s also nothing wrong about Roman numerals… they’re just awkward AF.

    Basic decimal notation doesn’t work well with some things, and insinuates incorrect answers.

    You could just as well argue that fractional notation “insinuates” that 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/6. You could argue that 8 + 8 is four because that’s four holes there. Lots of things that people can consider more intuitive than the intended meaning. Don’t get me started on English spelling.


  • barsoap@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzI just cited myself.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Terms.

    There! Syntax. We went over this. Seriously, we did, and, no, I got the last word.

    I suggest you check some Maths textbooks, instead of listening to a Physics major.

    I can check any textbook from any discipline. You know what? I could even ask my school teachers. Because I’m not American and I wasn’t taught shit that doesn’t match up with what professionals are doing.

    You’re just another yank drunk on jingoism, “We do it like that, therefore, it is right”.





  • barsoap@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzDomestication
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Also it’s not like “getting food is easier” is the only hypothesis out there as to why we settled down. Another one, IMO much more in line with human nature, is that we figured out how to ferment beer and for that reason planted buttloads of grain.



  • If you’re taking photos on a nude beach in Europe you’re getting decked. Kid, adult, doesn’t matter.

    There’s a massive fucking difference between sitting naked in a sauna with other naked people and sitting on public transit, fully dressed, gossiping about non-consensual nudes of children. How is that even a question. How are you capable of equating those things.


  • Help them remove the stigma around their bodies and sex, and empower them to speak and be heard when something they don’t like happens.

    This. So much this. If auntie wants to give them a kiss and they don’t want to get slobbered then tough fucking luck auntie, I’ll back the little shits up when they bite you. Predators are, by and large, able to do what they do because people don’t teach kids that they do, in fact, have bodily autonomy.

    And while I’m at it bodily autonomy of kids also implies that parents don’t parade photos around like some fucking trophy or something. Have some basic fucking regard for your own kids and what they want. How would you feel when they’re showing nude pictures of you to their classmates yeah I thought so.




  • Finding a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros is computationally intensive and typically involves a process known as “proof of work”

    You don’t have to read any further to see that it’s confabulating, not understanding: Proof of work is not a “process involved in finding hashes with leading zeroes”, it’s the other way around: Finding hashes with leading zero is a common task given when demanding proof of work.

    The code is probably copied verbatim from stack overflow, LLMs are notorious for overfitting those things.


  • barsoap@lemm.eetoScience Memes@mander.xyzI just cited myself.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    0.999… = 1 requires more advanced algebra in a pointed argument,

    You’re used to one but not the other. You convinced yourself that because one is new or unacquainted it is hard, while the rest is not. The rule I mentioned Is certainly easier that 2x/x that’s actual algebra right there.

    It’s as if all math must be regarded as infinitely perfect, and any unbelievers must be cast out to the pyre of harsh correction

    Why, yes. I totally can see your point about decimal notation being awkward in places though I doubt there’s a notation that isn’t, in some area or the other, awkward, and decimal is good enough. We’re also used to it, that plays a big role in whether something is judged convenient.

    On the other hand 0.9999… must be equal to 1. Because otherwise the system would be wrong: For the system to be acceptable, for it to be infinitely perfect in its consistency with everything else, it must work like that.

    And that’s what everyone’s saying when they’re throwing “1/3 = 0.333… now multiply both by three” at you: That 1 = 0.9999… is necessary. That it must be that way. And because it must be like that, it is like that. Because the integrity of the system trumps your own understanding of what the rules of decimal notation are, it trumps your maths teacher, it trumps all the Fields medallists. That integrity is primal, it’s always semantics first, then figure out some syntax to support it (unless you’re into substructural logics, different topic). It’s why you see mathematicians use the term “abuse of notation” but never “abuse of semantics”.