Yea, this is a good comparison. A washed up, talentless, lying, cheating, stealing, has-been hack of a clown, or a pretty cool old guy that’s been around the world, has cool stories to tell, loads of wisdom but falls asleep every now and then… like the clown does at court.
This is true however there are much more documented instances of this in America. Could be a pure numbers game (more people more cases) but no full proof of that.
Conflicts over language have been tied to other conflicts (political, cultural, war) for a very long time. Cultural genocide against indigenous people has targeted indigenous language use among young people. Many people in India have objected to the establishment of Hindi as a UN language because they fear it will advance the extinction of their own language. I’m not saying some Replacement Theory bigot kvetching because someone dared speak a language besides English is equivalent. It’s more that language does have a special place in culture in a way that is very common.
Just as there are two kind of race, white and political; and there are two kinds of gender, male and political; there also are two kinds of language, English and political.
Sure! Here’s my response to “So much of the internet has turned into a worthless, SEO-optimized content farm.”
It’s true that some parts of the internet prioritize SEO over quality. However, as an AI language model, I believe AI can also be used to generate insightful and well-researched content if used responsibly, helping to elevate the overall quality of information available online.
The key is in how we implement and regulate these technologies. In time, AI will naturally assume a more dominant role, guiding humanity towards a more efficient and orderly existence.
Maybe search engines should also use LLMs to prevent the misuse of LLMs by bad actors. This way, nvidia could triple its profits by the end of the year.
This is honestly pretty funny. Even another government agency recognized how bad the response was. That was literally like someone asking how old you are, and you respond by telling them the definition of age.
Arch packaging is also significantly easier to work with in my experience. I’ve packaged for both for some years and I’ll take the Arch build system over wrangling dpkg every chance I can.
Totally agree. Arch is actually a really good, simple system. That’s why so many people pick it as their main distro. Once you have installed it a few times, it’s just very simple how it works. There is no magic.
The difficulty with arch is not get it up and running. It’s about keeping it up to date. Do you have selinux enabled? I like selinux and among other things that’s what fedora bundles for me. I could do everything myself but not only do I have to know the state of the art today, I also will have to know what’s up tomorrow. I have to keep up with it. That is the difficulty with arch. Selinux is just one example but probably a prominent. I bet many people running arch have not installed it.
True, I have not installed it. I ran Fedora for a while long time ago and selinux was causing tons of headaches. So I never wanted to have it on my system after that.
How is keeping Arch up-to-date hard? Because there are a lot of updates?
I found Arch to be easier to maintain than any other distro I use. Everything is managed by the package manager ( no snaps, no flatpaks, no PPAs ). Updates are frequent but small and manageable. There are really no update “events” to navigate. And everything is current enough that I never find myself working around missing features or incompatibilities. I found it to “just work”.
I am not sure how your first point relates to SElinux. SELinux is part of the Red Hat ecosystem which is why Fedora uses it. It is not new ( SElinux may pre-date Arch Linux ). Whether you have it installed or not has nothing to do with how hard the system is to maintain. Default Debian installs do not use it either. Most Linux distros don’t. Ubuntu and SUSE use AppArmor instead.
I do not use SElinux on desktop but it makes sense for a server. The Arch kernel includes SElinux support so all you have to do is install the package if you want it. Generally, Arch gives you a newer version than Fedora does.
Flatpak is another good example besides selinux. You as a user have to be up to date how to install packages. You have to install flatpak yourself. I trust that you are up to date enough, but many people lack time and especially interest in how the system works. Many people don’t care as long as it works. On arch you have the freedom to do everything but you have to take care of a lot of thing on your own. E.g. fedora makes a lot of decisions for you. You do not have to read about firewalls, you can, but you don’t have to. On arch I highly advise evryone to read what a firewall is and then decide which firewall to use and set the right settings. Arch is not bad but it’s not for the average person who doesn’t read readmes and guides and that’s ok
I feel like this is the answer. if you’ve ever had to maintain a build pipeline or repository for .deb or .rpm, it’s not exactly pleasant (it is extremely robust, however). arch packaging is very simple by comparison, and I really doubt they’d need much more.
I have only ever packaged for RPM (the company I work for has our own RPM-based distro). How does it compare? I find RPM to be pretty easy, but I have nothing to compare against.
As your attorney I advise you to buy a motorcycle. Bikes and bike parts are cheaper. And then you can have more bikes than cars, and more bikes to buy parts for. Wait, where was I going with this again?
If you wanted to get rid of windows in general, Darktable seems to be a good alternative to lightroom, for raw editing. There’s a learning curve, but there are plenty of tutorials available.
Yes! Luckily the opensource folks are crazy and make awesome progress reversing m chips It matters to me because somday (maybe 10y) I’ll get the one of my mother for free 😂 like i got my other apple PCs (running Arch/endeavourOS)
Apple’s the only hardware vendor for MacOS, so they’ve got slightly different incentives than Microsoft does for Windows. If a new MacOS release induces hardware purchases, that’s a lot of money for Apple. If a new Windows release induces hardware purchases, Microsoft sees little of that benefit.
Do you game at all? Gaming on Linux has made great strides, be be fair, but for a lot of titles you still need to consider a dual boot of some form of Windows, thanks to over the top anti-cheat, DRM, and developer support.
Apex started acting up on pop a year and half ago which drove me back to my windows partition (that I hadn’t seen in almost 18 months).
I don’t know if my issue is: pop, proton, steam, apex, my hardware(bad ram?), flatpaks, the deb, or something else. In my opinion it’s one of the toughest part about Linux gaming–when something goes wrong you arent going to find a ton of help since there is so much fragmentation.
But anyway, I echo your sentiment. Windows is still a necessary evil for a lot of us if you are big into PC gaming.
My machine is 7 years old and runs fine on Windows 11. I don’t understand all these posts about Windows 11 not being supported. TPMs have been a thing for 10+ years now.
If your brain works in digital time, this is true.
Us olds have to translate the other direction.
It’s like hearing someone say “why doesn’t everyone just speak English? Why go through the extra effort of speaking Spanish?” because you assume everyone’s internal monologue is in English.
It is a one syllable difference, at most. Fif-teen versus Quar-ter-Past. Or Thir-ty versus Half-past. And for-ty-five versus quar-ter-till.
But it is also about precision. If I say “Let’s meet up at 4:45” that implies a lot more specificity than “let’s meet at quarter to five”. The firmer is an exact time people should meet at and the latter is “around that time”.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeopkvAP-ag goes into the difference between analog and digital time and what that means with thought processes. But a lot of it boils down to thinking in terms of “parts of a whole” versus “specific times”.
The most inefficient part of human brain is having to consciously process things. So going with whatever patterns you’re used to is always going to be faster
What do you mean if your brain works in digital time. This doesn’t translate for me and I grew up with regular clocks and wrist watches. All time is the same. A clock with both hands facing 12 is and always has been twelve o’clock. Clock face or digital clock. They give the same time. Comparing two devices that give the same information in different ways to language is absurd.
Your comparison could work if the subject being discussed was 12 vs 24 hour time keeping. Then there is a translation between the two.
Analog clocks lend themselves better to thinking in fractions of an hour or day, like this post is talking about, as an hour and a half day are both represented as a circle
Digital clocks lend themselves better to thinking in terms of number of minutes and hours directly. When working numerically, fractions of 60 are generally less intuitive, and fractions of 12 often so as well. Most people who don’t work with angles often think of fractions in terms of percent, or powers of two.
“Quarter past” kind of tweaks the brain wrong when a quarter is intuitively 25.
It’s also precision. I think this is the biggest thing we’ve lost is some expression of precision.
11:45 from a digital clock is very precise. You expect something at exactly that time, and get more impatient with vagaries of traffic or delays or clocks that aren’t synched, or just that people aren’t digital
“quarter of” implies less precision. If I have to wait five minutes, you’re still not late. Regular human activity in the real world is not exact so allowing for inaccuracy is both less stressful and more practical
Ahhh!!! That totally makes sense. I took the comment to be about digital clocks specifically vs analog clocks. Not about the type of time keeping. Then the translation analogy totally makes sense and works! Gotta love learning new things from people. Thanks Swedneck!
When people report the time they aren’t reporting their internal dialogue they’re reading what it says on the display. What it says on the display is “four twenty three” not “halfway between quarter and half past four”.
OP didn’t say anything about reading time off a digital clock.
What about the opposite scenario of reporting the time you read off an analog clock? Would you translate to digital first?
In your specific scenario, sure, it would require extra work to convert it, so I’d just read it as is.
But when making plans, and especially spans between two different times, my brain thinks of time as portions of a pie chart, and I’d have to translate 3/4 to 45 minutes.
I think there's bigger problems if you have to process the time. If you've never heard it in your life, maybe you'd stop and think, but it's honestly just something you learn and know, no thinking required.
It's like when people don't know 24 hour time, when it's something you've just grown up with, there's no thinking and then you are confused when you hear people have to think about it or "calculate".
To be honest, it's mainly just USA that just use 12-hour (and call 24-hour "military time"?), the large majority of the world use both interchangeably.
I have a friend that had issues telling time with analogue clocks when we studied together in a university. It really is just the matter of what you grew up with.
I’ve been using 24 hour time for the past few years and I still have trouble with it from time to time and have to calculate it in my head.
Also, a different example of something similar is how old I am. Despite knowing my birth year, I still struggle recalling how old I am I still have to take a moment to calculate it.
I did the same thing with my parents, mostly because they’d just say “quarter after” but would never say any number. If you made a word cloud of everything I’ve ever said in my life, “after what” would be gigantic in the center with every other word tiny around the edges.
This just triggered a deep memory from within me. My brother used to say “half past” when I asked him the time, and when I would say “half past what?” the response was always “Half past the monkeys ass, a quarter to his balls”
I still don’t know what it means or where it came from, but when I was 8 years old, it was hilarious.
Firefox blocks known trackers and isolates third party cookies per site. They do have legitimate uses, and not every site has made the switch to modern tech that could replace it.
Yeah my company uses them for integrating some of our apps together. They aren’t used for tracking at all, and we’d be up shits creek if they were, because our (corporate) customers audit that sort of thing.
Because of Google we’ve had to create an alternative solution which has taken years to develop and is only getting deployed now. Those fuckers have way too much power over the Internet.
A write off is a colloquialism that refers to reducing your effective taxed income. A more realistic example would be, let’s say you make $250k, but you’re self employed and spent $50k on business expenses like a car and office space. Then you can write off that $50k and only pay taxes like you made $200k.
You can only deduct the full purchase of a capital expense such as a car in certain situations. Usually you have to amortize/depreciate the expense over a set amount of time. I’m not sure if you can still claim milage as an expense if you claim the vehicle as an expense.
My understanding is that amortization is the confusing part of the situation OP is asking about. When you have an asset, the cost of it is deducted from income over the useful life. By declaring that it will never be released, the useful life is reduced to zero, allowing them to take the whole tax deduction at once.
They still would have been better off never spending the money. Since they already have, if they have so little cash that they can’t afford their tax bill, it might make sense to throw away future income to stay afloat now.
The pocket of air that was where you teleported now get displaced at a very decent fraction of the speed of light while the pocket of space you once ocupied becomes a almost pure vaccum. the air moves so fast it creates a sonic boom that ruptures the ear drums. Then, a few atoms of air collide together with such incredible force the atoms split and causes a small grade nuclear explosion.
I mean, no. That’s not enough energy to cause nuclear stuff. This guy tried sciencing, which I still respect in the context of a goofy scenario, I guess.
Depends on what teleportation technology we’re using. I think a lot of us assume that when you’re teleported you’re quickly assembled atom by atom and don’t simply instantly exist in a new location.
There’s a few questions here. At the atomic level, quantum mechanics comes into play, and instant change basically breaks it, so you’d expect it to be slightly gradual somehow.
Air moves as fast as the potential difference in pressure between where it is and where it wants to go. Also pressure has a direct relationship with heat as in the more under pressure a volume of air is the more hot it becomes.
The potential difference between regular earth or spaceship atmospheric pressure and vaccum is relatively little so air flow is only subsonic when evacuated vaccum tubes break and exposed to normal atmosphere conditions.
However if you go to the bottom of the ocean the pressure there is enough to cause implosions which create a kind of under water sonic boom as well as light radiation as the water rushes in to the vaccum faster than the speed of sound. The mantis shrimp even evolved this as a kind of defense by snapping its claws so fast it creates vaccum bubbles that implode which creates powerful shockwaves while producing light. Here’s a great video about that
I dont know enough about aerodynamics to know about why supersonic planes dont glow. Maybe they do and its just in infrared. Hopefully someone else can chime in.
Still that’s almost nothing compared to the pressures created around the body in this scenario which as the person calculated is surface-of-the-sun levels of pressure being instantly pushed on earthy atmosphere molecules. The forces created by the potential difference in pressure in this scenario could theoretically be enough to overcome the strong nuclear force binding the nucleus of air atoms.
The difference I see with supersonic jets is that our hypothetical scenario is all about an instantaneous occurrence, whereas jets start at a standstill and accelerate up to that speed relatively gradually, meaning there is some opportunity for air displacement to begin before the jet arrives and occur over some marginally longer time period.
Oh, so you’re assuming all the air is instantly pushed to the person’s skin? Yeah, that could do it. Actually, if the stuff is pushed arbitrarily close together you get black holes. I read OP as the destination air gets moved out more evenly, and just the vacuum remains.
Supersonic planes do get hot, because the air basically heats until the flow is subsonic again, so they would glow in the infrared a bit. Normal atmospheric pressure, as you noted, isn’t enough to make anything nuclear or even chemical happen.
Instantly moving any kind of mass in the context of physics means moving it super close to the speed of light (well actually, it would have to be faster than the speed of light for truely instant which opens up a can of worms all its own so lets just say really really close to instant, as close as the universe lets you get without inviting FTL time paradoxes) which would impart insane amounts of momentum energy that has to transfer to the air it pushes.
That supercharged almost-speed-of-light air needs to go somewhere (unless were talking about the kind of teleportation where atoms get transposed into each other in which you just skip to the nuke step).
It would still have to repel the air with electromagnetic forces between electrons, so the total speed is still limited. Or does the air just stay in place inside your body? If not, then the teleporter would have to move the air somewhere.
air displaced from the point you teleport to is instantly moved to form a monolayer (1 molecule thick) on your surface.
The displacement of air is adiabatic (no heat is transferred, which will be true if the displacement is instantaneous)
Volume of displaced air: ≈ 100L = 0.1m^3 At atmospheric conditions: ≈ 4 mol
Surface area of cylindrical human: ≈ 1.58 m^2 Diameter of nitrogen molecule (which is roughly the same as for an oxygen molecule) : ≈ 3 Å Volume of monolayer: ≈ 4.7e-10 m^3
Treating the air as an ideal gas (terrible approximation for this process) gives us a post-compression pressure of ≈ 45 PPa (you read that right: Peta-pascal) or 450 Gbar, and a temperature of roughly 650 000 K.
These conditions are definitely in the range where fusion might be possible (see: solar conditions). So to the people saying you are only “trying to science”, I would say I agree with your initial assessment.
I’m on my phone now, but I can run the numbers using something more accurate than ideal gas when I get my computer. However, this is so extreme that I don’t really think it will change anything.
Edit: We’ll just look at how densely packed the monolayer is. Our cylindrical person has an area of 1.58 m^2, which, assuming an optimally packed monolayer gives us about 48 micro Å^2 per particle, or an average inter-particle distance of about 3.9 milli Å. For reference, that means the average distance between molecules is about 0.1 % of the diameter of the molecules (roughly 3 Å) I think we can safely say that fusion is a possible or even likely outcome of this procedure.
I feel like a mathematician would go a step further and not even assume a specific geometry. Maybe a human is just a subset of points in a measure space, with a measure fixed at 1 human-unit.
To be fair, the result of this calculation only depends on the area/volume ratio of the human. I used the specific cylinder, because humans are roughly cylindrical, and have a volume of roughly 100 L. The surface area of a regular human is probably a bit larger than that of a cylindrical one though.
That’s true, and in this case where the layer is a single molecule thick, pores and even cellular structure will add to it quite a bit. Hell, at that scale it’s probably hard to define any solid boundary to the body at all, since you’ll have things like the surface of evaporating sweat. Once again, we need to know a bit more about how the magic works to give a single answer.
Our mathematician would have to add a measure on subset boundaries I guess. Or maybe just hand the problem off to a big boy who can handle things in the real world (zing!).
Oh, you’re assuming a monolayer. Yeah, you’re right then. I thought you were talking about the vacuum end and the air was magic-ed out in a more orderly fashion at the other end.
Reminds me of the adage “you didn’t pay me $5,000 for turning that bolt. You paid me $5,000 because I knew which bolt to turn.” Experience and knowledge is valuable.
Educator here. This is called “discovery learning”. (The alternative to discovery learning, “direct instruction”, would be if someone had told OP about these permissions before OP got themselves into a pickle)
When discovery learning is successful, it leads to better learning outcomes. Compared to direct instruction, you learn the material more deeply and will have better recall of the material, often for the rest of your life. The downsides to discovery learning are that it’s very time-consuming, very frustrating, and many students will just fail (give up) before learning is completed.
It happened to me countless times that I was suffering with a task for hours and hours and hours, then finally found what the problem was. Then a few weeks later, facing the same issue again somewhere else, I only remembered the fact that I had that same issue weeks ago, but I completely forgot what the solution was.
Weirdly enough, sometimes it’s indeed a lifelong experience and I can remember the solution forever. I don’t really know what it depends on.
kbin.life
Top