batmaniam @ batmaniam @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

323

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes, sorry, I did oversimplify to the local network. On your local network everything is always listening, but absolutely your home router/modem in Kansas does NOT excite some wires in Tokyo unless you tell it to lol.

And it sounds like you know way more about the software than I do, but I can say with confidence that when a router starts putting ossilating high/low on a cable, everything on that cable "sees" it. I'm fairly sure that's why different address blocks have the limits they do; there's only so many addresses you can have without needing to ossiclate that voltage stupid fast.

You should look into some of the serial examples for raspberry pis/ arduinos, with your software background you'd probably really enjoy it! It's funny to run into things like the fact that you can have issues like the wire not going back to low sometimes, and the myriad physical issues.

And seriously check out MODBUS. It's crazy how "simple" it is. With no handshake and a standardized data format, you can trigger all sorts of stuff. That's the protocol that controls most people industrial things, including GIANT pumps and valves.

I wrote up a whole thing that didn't post. There's good answers here but I think that, like me, you wanted a more "voltage based" one.

Short answer is they don't. Everything on the network is always listening, and security is based solely off of a handshake. Everything is always employing a fancy multimeter that measures voltage high/low as a 1/0 turning it from bits to bytes etc. The router listens to that and decides where to send it upstream, which it isolates from downstream.

For a realllllly basic example look at the modbus protocol. That's also why industrial equipment folks get real touchy about network access. For things like computers, theres talk back and forth to verify. Modbus is just "if the byte is the thing I do the thing". But fundamentally, that's the physical basis: all devices are always listening, the TCP/IP stack is what tells them what to disregard.

So most fungi do have a lifespan, they have teleomere decay, and when you're cloning mushrooms (from propagating mycelia) you have to let them go to fruit (the part that looks like a mushroom) every now and then. It's a pain in the ass.

But like the other poster said, they play it fast and loose with which part you consider the "organism". My favorite thing is that they do cytosolic streaming. Genetics can be a pain on mushrooms because not only do they share nutrients and metabolic burden through mycelia, they can share nuclei.

One of the weird convienent realities we used extensively is that cells are big enough you can spread them over a petri dish with a little loop, and if you diluted the initial sample enough, the colonies that developed were, practically speaking, from one parent cell. So you could try to modify a bunch, and then plate them (spreading the cells around) and pick individual colonies that were all clones from a single parent. Fungi mycelia means the nucleus isn't stuck in one cell. It also means expression levels can be variable (some cells will have multiple nuclei, and then later maybe they don't).

Fungi are a godamn pain in the ass to study. They're not mysterious, they're not alien, they're just fucking assholes.

Native English speaker, my favorite god bit is mormor is literally "mom's mom", where as your other grandma would be morfar (dad's mom); there's maternal/paternal lineage built in.

Also in Norwegian (probably most scandavian) grand children get the same treatment. Barne is child so your grandchild, your child's child, is your barnebarne.

I don't see why you couldnt, but you'd need a buyer. Like if you had a funding round you might include in part of your use of proceeds a small buyback/ sell to cover like you're talking about. If the company was doing the sell to coverthats definitely easier cash wise than a bonus but not 0.

All these rules make total sense, they're just hard for really early companies. The lawyer calls alone on this stuff start to add up in a hurry and if you skip them you may have just screwed the people you want to help and muddied things for any future raise.

For the record it absolutely is taxed as such. As soon as it vests the IRS considers it income, whether they sell it for the cash or not.

Its a huge headache for startups sometimes. I had team members I wanted to compensate but just giving them the equity would have been an imediate big tax bill on a non-liquid, and speculative, asset. There's ways to massage it (like vesting) but he will absolutely have that taxed.

Oh, and I could be wrong but I think the share value is just taxed as ordinary income, not capital gains. Ie: if the award is denominated in $1 shares, which he sells for $1.10, the $0.10 gets capital gain rates (if he held it for a year) but the $1 is taxed just like a paycheck.

After a quick googling, they also were on the religiously unpopular side of embryonic stem cells.

Prey (2017) is an awesome FPS/immersive Sim. As in, it plays like a shooter but how you take each engagement is highly up to you. You can go in guns blazing, there's usually some way to use the environment, go out of your way to get robot helpers, mind control one of the enemy, sneak past entirely. It's one of my all time faves because it has depth but draws you in like an fps. I love stuff like obra din but don't always have the energy to get lost in them.

And the plot is awesome. Not a ton of replay ability (imo, but I'm difficult there) but definitely a meaty amount of time. highly recommend headphones.

Haven't run it on the deck but a quick search shows people are really happy with it's performance there.

It's not. He's in office during a crisis and directly involved. It's not some big conspiracy but this is why "celebrity" politicians are a bad idea. You don't get to shit post if you have access to nuclear weapons. Is it funny? Sure. But all it did for me was solidify how out of touch democrats are right now.

Man, if you liked deloused I get why you'd be disappointed by what comes after, but Francis the Mute is something else. It's structured way different, it's a damn opera, but 20 years on that is my all time favorite album.

Among football fans we also like pointing out how Kelce, a superstar player, just about as high as you can get... essentially makes lemonade stand money next to her. It was the same for Brady and Gisel to. I imagine there's a certain stripe of person that drives a little nuts.

Personally I love it. Those guys are absolute top of their field in something insanely demanding and stressful, and the money is essentially pointless. So the relationship must be pretty decent. It's also just funny to picture THOSE guys going through the dance you have to if you've ever dated someone with a very different income/lifestyle. Like you can navigate it in a committed relationship, but the early stages can be a bit dicey. "ughh, I need a release, after the seasons over do you want to go to that place in the Mediterranean?" .

Seriously. There is a conspiracy here, and it's to get the Chief's to win. /s. Probably. Not really. Yes I'm bitter.

All joking aside I miss when we could have "low stake" conspiracy theories. Now we have genuine flat earthers and the like, it's only a matter of time before someone weaponizes the "birds aren't real" meme. I swear god people will look back at pizzagate as the definitive marker where the world forgot 4chan was primarily a joke.

It's just one of those things in terms of logic of the system giving rise outside of itself. Like I said, dogma and religion are two very different things. I just find a lot of beauty in the fact that science can predict literal apotheosis by our own definition; it's inherent in the system. If someone chooses to see that and assign intent, I can't argue.

There's just something amazing about a system which defines the conditions which are outside it's grasp. It's like how banach-tarski shows 1+0=2. Practical? Not really, but none the less... under certain conditions...

Well right, which is why they're separate things entirely. And I am definitely taking some poetic license, but I outlined a pretty concrete example of how the way the scientific process is structured it's a tool for what's demonstrable, not inherently what's correct. In what I outlined, it's possible you could never gather that data. In every sense that matters most of the universe would no longer exist.

You can do the same thing in reverse (we'll never actually know what happened at the big bang, we weren't there, still we can figure out a lot). It just drives the point home more when you realize there are things you can look at, observe, make hypothesis and test against here today, that will essentially leave the realm of science in the future.

So again, this is definitely some navel gazing, and I'm just about as atheistic as they come, but the original spawn of this part of the thread was "how can any scientist be religious". It's because the scientific process isn't actually concerned with being "correct", now or in the future, just plausible and useful. I've worked in the lab with folks who viewed their work as understanding the universe someone created for them. That's entirely compatible with the scientific method. You can take a minute to appreciate the insanity and beauty of everything we know about this universe and the fact that were even capable of comprehending some of it without it corrupting your scientific method. Some people choose to appreciate that insanity and beauty and assign divine intent. So long as the graph has a decent R^2, that's just fine.

Science and religion (in the broad sense, not specific statements of a religion) are just two entirely separate things. Faith by it's definition exists outside anything testable, so it's just not part of science. Here's the one hitch: science does in-fact point to faith. Bare with me here.

We know with whatever certainty anyone would require that the universe is expanding, and that the rate of that expansion is accelerating. We know with certainty that >90% of all that we know is there, just by looking up, is already permanently and irrevocably beyond our grasp. It will all blink out of the night sky, and no interaction will ever be possible.

Future scientists (human, alien, whatever) will look at certain phenomena, the cause of which we today would know to be a specific galaxy, etc, but we would have no way to gather a single shred of evidence. There would be no way, literally none, to ever interreact with those stellar structures.

To these future scientists you would be citing ancient texts and proposing a 100% untestable hypothesis. You would be proposing literal gods outside of the machine. And you'd be right. But it would all have to be taken on faith.

ABS/pumping the brakes is implemented because sliding friction is less that static friction. It's why you can nudge something on a slope to start sliding and it doesn't stop but would have happily sat there before hand.

Your car wheels experience static friction because while in motion the patch in contact with the road isn't moving. Or at least they do until you skid.

So ABS brakes/releases to get a new round of static friction.

Pumping the brakes is probably a phrase that came from before power assisted brakes (when you were manually pressurizing the hydraulics) but still had relevance because it was also ABS.

I just want to say I needed a laugh this morning and you delivered lmfao. Thanks stranger.

It is cool as hell, and for anyone who's going "huh?", I'm going to get this half wrong, but it has to do with making sure they don't fall into "rythem" with their predators cycles. The odds of synchronizing to a prime are lower (because years are integers and a prime can only be in sync with itself or larger, not smaller).

Trees will have mast years on primes where they'll produce just a crazy amount of acorns. Because they haven't in so long, the squirrel population etc didn't explode. So they'll feast that year but can't get to them all, and while the population of squirrels might grow that year, next year is a low acorn year again.

Not Japan specifically, but I've got say I'm jealous as hell about the snack scene in east Asia.

I generally don't have a sweet tooth, and things like potato chips don't have that umami I like. I try to keep snacks around because I forget to eat, but nothing appeals to me. But man... all those pre-packaged tofu squares, various bits of marinated meat... that's my deal. There's one solid "Asian Mart" near me, I'll stock up a few months worth at a time.

Closest you get in the US is basically jerky/slim jims, which are great but expensive and kind of one note for flavor.

Wow that is fantastic. I'm surprised no one "imported" that one to the states in "make everything a start-up!" days early-mid 2010s.

As a tip, it's not quite as convenient but most hotels will let you check a bag with them, even if you're not a guest. I've done that at different conferences (usually 1st day and/or last day) when I had a day left, didn't want to haul my bag, but couldn't go to from my hotel. I think I got turned down once and it was simply because they were full.