Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)UM
Posts
0
Comments
602
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • significance refers to a measurement certainty about a number itself, especially its precision! and is unrelated to the magnitude/scale. the number and dimension "2.5634 mm" has more significant digits than the number "5,000 mm", though the most significant digit is 2 and 5 respectively, and least significant 4 and 5 respectively. this is true if i rewrite it as 0.0025634 m and 5 m. it does work for doing what you say in this case because a date is equivalent to a single number, but is not correct in other situations. that's why i said it does work here.

    largest to smallest increment is completely adequate, and describes the actual goal here well. most things are ambiguous if you try hard enough.

  • You are looking not for precision but for largest to smallest, descending order. this is distinct from precision, a measure of how finely measured something is. 2025.07397 is actually more precise than 2025/01/27, but is measured by the largest increment.

  • tech has been subsidizing ai costs by magnitudes for years trying to make fetch happen, slop is slop. it's overvalued like crazy and the first hint of market competition has drained trillions from the stocks because it's an overvalued bubble. if china can do that by releasing competition then ok. maybe we should all be putting these trillions in things actually useful to humans.

  • rule

    Jump
  • those darn 1920s anarchists and communists, the most famous users of the term red fash, notorious right wingers trying to push people away from communism. 😂 so ahistorical.

  • rule

    Jump
  • i am mostly rolling my eyes at the self tells of me saying fascism is unconditionally bad and you taking personal offense at that and looking for leftist purity tests lmao.

  • rule

    Jump
  • you have yet to explain where you are actually hearing that lmfao. unless, of course, being against violent repression and fascism as a rule somehow insults your sensibilities.

  • rule

    Jump
  • i think the AANES have been very impressive in their efforts, personally. Funny how you dodged answering for how you got "doesnt support leftist movements" for defining tankie. 🤔

  • rule

    Jump
  • someone who claims to be leftist but tacitly or gleefully supports authoritarianism, imperialism, or violent repression. Many are easily identifiable by their pointing to places that are not The West™️ and smoothing over, apologizing for, or denying, blatant horrors on the basis that they are unfriendly with the west. sometimes called red fascists.

    It's actually important to ostracize these people as they are obviously the most blatant opportunists in leftist movements looking to implement authoritarian repressive regimes.

  • i think you need to do more to justify that this is viewpoint discrimination, "tiktok" does not appear to me to be a viewpoint. i think you have a stronger argument with saying it is the broader content based discrimination, though. however id still question if that's true with respect to corporations hosting eachothers services. id say you have a stronger argument than viewpoint discrimination by saying it violates the first ammendment of the users of tiktok, personally, though the courts might disagree. i dont really care about apple and google's right to free speech at anywhere near the level of individual humans.

  • the comment you are responding to pretty levelheadedly describes why they dont agree that it's only tiktok bad and that being in favor of this being a 1st ammendment issue specifically could make every issue you bring up actively worse. it does not appear you are responding to them. the problem you are describing is real, there's a substantial nationalism component to this and it's bad when us companies do it as well. but you arent responding to their point about framing this as a 1st ammendment issue being problematic.