CapeWearingAeroplane @ CapeWearingAeroplane @sopuli.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

265

Joined

2 yr. ago

Long live 4chan

Vsauce for me as well, I like veritasium, because I feel like the questions being asked/answered are legitimately interesting questions/answers. With Vsauce I feel like the whole thing is just about him constructing unnecessarily "out of the box" answers in order to look smart.

Honest question from someone using C++, though not for systems- or embedded stuff, just for object oriented models that gotta go fast: Why is C++ not in the same ballpark, and not an alternative?

Have you never spent your spare time contributing to something you care about? I spend time contributing to open source code and Wikipedia, previously I've spent time building stuff to make a local park nicer. I could definitely see myself spending time campaigning for a political party if I felt the future of my country depended on it.

When you're doing something like that, spending time on something you have a passion for together with others, it's typically more fun and fulfilling than tiresome. You should try it some time.

Good luck! :D

People not getting this... computers are inherently binary (until quantum computers become truly viable). That's the joke.

I don't know if this is done in practice, but if you have a nuclear powered sub, implementing a water electrolyzer that makes oxygen is fairly trivial. Then you have air as long as you have power, so they could in principle stay submerged for ≈ 20 years, or however long the nuclear reactors can go without refill.

I think that's reasonable. As long as someone is posting relevant content, there should be no obligation to interact with their own posts.

My solution, which I honestly believe leads to a much more happy life consist of two things:

Have a conscious relationship to what you can do something about. "Dog peed in laundry" is a great example. It's already happened, there's nothing I can do to change that, so I'll just fix the problem. No point in getting irritated. The point is: Don't get mad about stuff you can't change/influence.

Always give everyone the benefit of doubt. If someone says something hurtful, like "your mother is a fat asshole™ ", I'll try to think "maybe they have legitimate concerns about my mothers health, and legitimate concerns about how she's treating others that I should bring up with her", rather than immediately thinking they're just trying to hurt me. That me be disproven in later conversation, but I believe it helps me treat others in a better way, and helps me be a more balanced person.

That's exactly your problem. You understood that they had no ill intentions, but you still had to spend time badgering them and going after them to prove a point.

You could have chosen to interpret their post in a way that didn't offend you, but you chose to get offended, and then you try to make them look like the asshole for not bending over backwards when you "hurt yourself in your confusion".

I think people talking about premature optimisation are often talking about micro-optimisations. Those are almost always unnecessary until you've identified choke points. Optimising the overall architecture of the code base on the other hand, is in my opinion something that should be thought about before you even start coding. That's where the major gains can often be done anyway.

Also, it's practical. If you know something is twice as concentrated (12% instead of 6%) you know to drink it more carefully, rather than if you get a jug of something and it just says how much alcohol is in there, then you have to mentally calibrate how strong it is by considering the volume of the jug vs. how much alcohol there is.

I've never heard that take before, cool! I've always loved the final cut in inception, because I felt that I just had to choose to believe that it was a happy ending. I also like the interpretation that by the end he no longer cares whether he is in a dream or not. But I just really want to believe that the top is actually about to fall when the last scene cuts.

To be fair, I'm a decent programmer: I spend a significant portion of my workdays programming all kinds of things. Writing a program to generate sudoku's with a unique solution, without copy pasting a bunch of algorithms, but actually making it all up yourself definitely sounds non-trivial to me.

(Read: That sounds like a really hard beginner project, and you should be proud for even trying, and you shouldn't give up :) )

This may be old advice, and I can't speak for music or languages (where I myself have the same issue) but for woodworking and programming this is my experience: Once I get some idea for something I want to build, that becomes the goal of the project, not learning the skill itself. It could be carving a small model boat, or writing a sudoku solver, but at least for my part, once I get caught up in some project, I have a hard time letting it go. That's as opposed to if I sit down and try to systematically learn a skill.

Some suggestions for projects off the top of my head:

• Some kind of simple encryption/decryption method.
• A nice wooden box to put something nice in (possibly without visible metal parts)
• A sudoku solver
• Model car (maybe with wheels and movable doors)
• A little "river steamer" with a rubber-band driven "propeller" (don't know what the wheel on the back of a river steamer is called)
• A "peg solitaire" solver (because I was really frustrated at not being able to solve it)

The point is just to find something else that interests you, that can motivate you to learn the skill you want :) good luck!

I think this response is great, because, while I'm on the other side of the fence (theoretical chemist that sucks at anything artistry related) I think it's a common misconception that math/science/engineering isn't creative.

I find that misconception both with people struggling to learn it, and often with people teaching it. The reason I bring it up is that, in my experience, the "hard" sciences become both more fun and easy to learn, and more easy to teach, when creativity is encouraged. For my own part, I'm wildly chaotic in the way I solve problems, and my notes are typically a jumbled mess of drawings and scribbles. For my students part, I've seen stuff loosen for a lot of people when they're encouraged to just let their thoughts flow out on their paper, rather than thinking everything through five times first.

By all means: There's a difference between math and art, but I think a lot of maths teachers and students could have a better time if they allowed themselves to think more artistically, especially those that are well inclined to it.

There seems to be a slight misunderstanding here: If you imagine the "moment before" the big bang that is a state where the entire universe is compressed into a singularity, which necessarily has no entropy, because it can only have one state. Once the universe started expanding, you get a whole lot of disorder, because, while you are forming particles (introducing order) those particles are moving away from each other at relativistic speeds. The available volume for the particles (the volume of the universe) increases extremely rapidly, meaning you have more possible microstates than if all particles were compressed into a point.

Exactly! Then you agree that because chatgpt can be coerced into spitting out raw, unmodified data, distributing it is a violation of copyright. Glad we're on the same page.

You should look up the term "rhetorical question" by the way.

If I scrape a bunch of data, put it in a database, and then make that database queryable only using obscure, arcane prompts: Is that a derivative work permitted under fair use?

Because if you can get chatgpt to spit out raw training data with the right prompt, it can essentially be used as a database of copyrighted stuff that is very difficult to query.

First of all no: Training a model and selling the model is demonstrably equivalent to re-distributing the raw data.

Secondly: What about all the copyleft work in there? That work is specifically licensed such that nobody can use the work to create a non-free derivative, which is exactly what openAI has done.