Contravariant @ Contravariant @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

86

Joined

2 yr. ago

Keep in mind that for the way UK elects MPs something like Alternative Vote (or even approval voting, which I prefer) would only help with the problem that only 2 parties have any chance of winning in each particular constituency.

It doesn't get around the issue that '% of constituencies where party X wins the election' and '% of votes cast for party X' are in no way the same thing.

If UK politicians had any sense they'd fix the voting system that let that happen.

Obviously they won't because that same system put them in power and is currently holding far-right at bay, but it would be nice.

I'd say that's slightly off. Most terrorists have no intention of actually ruling the regions they terrorize.

These people are more fascists.

I am, no worries.

Dissent is not creativity.

Using reverse proxies is common enough now that quite a few apps can deal with subpaths, and for the ones that can't you can generally get nginx to rewrite the paths for you to make things work.

What genius decided to denote the difference by using three shades of the exact same colour?

Because 1 bar is almost atmospheric pressure. Oddly enough I've never seen anyone use kPa, weather forecasts often use hPa (instead of mbar) to report atmospheric pressure.

Is signal not a viable option? Or can you still not use it without leaking your phone-number?

Put simply you just give every candidate points out of 10 and then elect the one with the highest average.

Approval voting (not acceptance, my mistake), simplifies things a bit by only allowing none or all points. Which is the best if you want to vote tactically anyway.

This method sidesteps a couple of the issues that Arrow's impossibility theorem raises, and is easy enough to understand. Ranked choice is better than first past the post but still has the issue that adding an additional candidate can affect the end result in complex ways.

With approval voting most aspects are easy to understand. Adding or removing candidates trivially has no effect on the rest of the result. And while you can still vote tactically the only real tactic is where you put your cutoff, you should still vote for the option(s) you like best.

In a way AI refusing to recommend using so much computing power on LLMs could well be the first sign of actual intelligence.

Not sure about the self-driving, but he had a video challenging the idea that electrons in wires that carry electricity. Basically arguing that it was the electric fields themselves that carried the power, which is largely outside of the actual wires.

Not sure if that's the same one where he asked what would happen if you used a light switch connected to a lamp by two wires. Apart from some truly egregious mistaken units (1s/c as unit of time), I vaguely recall thinking it was basically a huge clusterfuck of misunderstandings about what an electrical circuit diagram even is (stuff like real vs idealized components, parasitic capacitance / inductance etc.)

They're the kind of 'Well actually' half true factoids that you never hope to encounter in the wild if you actually understand the stuff. For someone claiming to be enthusiastic about science communication he did one heck of a job poisoning concepts with subtly wrong/misleading explanations that make it a lot harder to explain stuff to anyone with the misfortune to encounter his version first.

Why not acceptance/range voting?

Setting Milei aside for a minute, should you wish to revise government you nigh always need to do so from a position of power. This also applies if you actually wish to reduce the power government has.

Technically giving yourself absolute power makes sense even for someone acting in good faith wanting to reduce or improve government. Wouldn't be the first time someone fucked up the succession though.

I think /r/science is misunderstood. The moderators had quite a clear vision on the kind of discussion they wanted and the kind they did not. This caused some friction every time a post reached /r/all but I don't see that as a bad thing.

If anything that's an ideal situation. People encounter a new community they're interested in, break some rules in ignorance, the mods interfere and the violations are rolled back, the new users then either follow the rules or leave.

Not sure how they're doing with the API changes, pretty sure they had some automation going. Don't think they're compatible with reddit's new view on making communities as interchangeable as possible to stop friction from interfering with ad revenue.

You might want to mark that NSFW. Don't want to be caught reading some discussion with the word union in it.

The third is more gravity than physics, or perhaps you should consider it the absence of gravity.

What I'm trying to say is: stop following geodesics.

I think we won Lemmy.

We lost reddit though, not the current reddit, but the one that was.

The extra syntax is just to add some features that aren't in CSS. Not quite sure where this came from, I think it's from the Adblock Plus era, but Gorhill perfected it for uBlock origin, which makes it a very powerful tool.

It's not limited to just hiding the elements either, if you want you can simply restyle them (I've used this to redact sports results until I hovered over them).

Fair. It's not too hard, but most lemmy UIs make it a bit harder than it needs to be because they want to be a fancy JavaScript-ridden mess of html tags.

On old.lemmy.world it is supremely easy, you just use the element picker tool of uBlock to select all posts, add the 'magic' command :contains(reddit) to filter out the word you don't want (in this case reddit), and you've got your filter. This would result in old.lemmy.world##.post:contains(reddit).

On lemmy.world it is trickier because it is the kind of HTML no sane person would write. Doing the above you end up with lemmy.world##div.mt-2.post-listing:contains(reddit) which is messy, and misses a line that is used to divide the posts. With some manual tuning you can first simplify the first part to ##.post-listing:contains(reddit) and then add :xpath(.|following::hr[1]) to get rid of the annoying line. This results in ##.post-listing:contains(reddit):xpath(.|following::hr[1]).