• 3 Posts
  • 283 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 9th, 2024

help-circle



  • Two things occurred to me reading this:

    1. Huge numbers are exceedingly common, but counting particles is the wrong way to find them. Combinatorics is where the real monster hunting lies. When you start calculating complex probabilities or numbers of possible arrangements of things, that’s where the fuzzy boundary between “infinite” and “really, really, really finitely big” starts to blur.
    2. I think looking to CompSci is the right move, but I still don’t see many folks discussing computational complexity as a real, mathematical limit. We often treat two equal statements as though theres an immediate, single-step, jump between them. But discovering the equality requires computation/calculation. Shannon shows that information and entropy are the same thing. Computation is the process by which information is created. Ultrafinitist need to show that there is a finite quantity of information, which I don’t think is true or possible.




  • Ugh, this joke doesn’t even make sense and why are random words bolded? Load bearing? While laying in a box?

    Wouldn’t it have been funnier to make use of the properties of the etch a sketch? Like “Oh no, you didnt erase my shed blue prints did you?!” Or draw attention to the joke of it being mixed with the tools, like “That E-a-S has been handed down by the carpenters of my family for generations” or just any joke that ties back into the comic.




  • It’s an old instinct. Visual workflow tools have been around for a long time. And I’ve had at least one bluesky project at every job ive been at long enough that basically amounted to “can you design a way for non-programmers to program this” from visual workflow designers to simplified query and definition domain specific languages.

    I was reading an interesting article on the ladder of abstractions that I’m hoping will give me a more unified view across the phenomenon.

    I think the general form of the problem is that as development work proceeds from prototyping into production, the need for large amounts of configuration across the domain comes into focus. Unfortunately, this usually just signals the need for a lot more development to cover special cases. But what many see is a need for a lighter-weight configuration system that will allow “the users” to self-manage.

    This runs into two problems, usually at a late phase when the only solutions are to put a lot of work into the no/low-code config system or to get developers using those systems. The first problem is the config system not being powerful enough to cover the full domain of the problem, which exacerbates the need for devs as it grows into a fully Turing complete language. The second problem is that non-devs aren’t devs, the issue the blog post is getting at, and handing a logic-problem to people who’s jobs are mostly rote without a lot of problem solving is asking for fast workarounds instead of well-reasoned solutions.

    Tangent: i just watched a great video on the history of the ZSNES emulator, one of the pioneering emulators. It took decades to get wide compatibility with available ROMs, because so many cartridges used custom chips for enhanced processing. Emulating StarFox isn’t just about replicating what an SNES does, you also need to emulate the custom SuperFX chip that came with the game. That means the domain of “emulate all SNES games” can’t just be passed off to non-devs once the core CPU is done. Each specific problem (different games) requires new development for a custom solution, because each cartridge was itself the bespoke solution to a complex problem domain if it’s own.

    In short, “complex problems in wide domains that are not fully understood or solved” are the ideal ground for developers, but businesses want to drive towards well understood, solved, domains where cheap workers can crank out money. There is incredible tension and ungodly amounts of money being poured into bridging the gap between those as cheaply as possible in a general sense. This is what’s largely driving AI adoption.

    But again, you can’t just magic away that core part of the situation: someone must reason through and understsnd the actual problem in order to solve it.







  • Other than what everyone else has said (great taste in film, lemmings) I’ll throw out…

    In the Mouth of Madness. People tend to rank The Thing as his best movie, but the other two parts of the “Apocalypse Trilogy” are also excellent. Prince of Darkness has plenty to reccomend it, but I actually have watched IMM at least 10 times. The practical effects hold up well, and I feel like I catch new little details or acting quirks on each watch. Sam Neill and Julie Carmen are both really on their game and amazingly bring a lot of both subtlety and camp to the roles. The soundtrack is really banging too, if you’re a fan of Carpenter’s synth-rock.

    And for something completely different, but still an “at least 10 views” favorite: Rian Johnson’s Brick. You’ll probably need at least 2 viewings just to catch all the dialogue, which is very fast and uses a weird made up slang. The main victim makes a phone call in the first act that basically reveals everything if you understand what she’s saying, but it takes the whole movie for that to happen. It’s just a fun, good mystery story too. Great sense of style, great (slightly off kilter) acting choices all around. Its one of those movies that’s a little like poetry or a great album, just fun to watch and enjoy for itself.




  • CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoScience Memes@mander.xyzBird
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    And now folks, realize that this is true of every single thing that humans think about.

    You put a duck and a sparrow side by side and maybe it seems obvious that, while not the same, these two things have something deeply in common. But most people have never considered them in one thought. When you get into abstract ideas like “freedom” or “socialism” is it any surprise that most people can’t even recognize them, let alone agree on any commonalities?

    You spend all day arranging dogs next to bears going “do you see how these are both canine-form mammals?” and the public is watching a tiktok while dismissing you going “Uh bears aren’t pets, what a dumbass!”


  • It’s sad how deeply right wing people believe in magic words. They’re convinced that if they just had the power to say this word in public, that would also reverse everything else. If they could just call their boss or landlord or a cop the N-word, suddenly, they wouldn’t have to work or pay rent or be arrested anymore!

    I mean Yarvin doesn’t think that. He thinks rich assholes should be able to say anything, and invent new slurs for varying levels of poorness.

    They do all seem to have forgotten that slurs don’t make you fire or bullet proof.

    It does really irritate me though, like who the fuck are they even mad about to say that specifically the Black billionaires are the ones causing me harm? Like, don’t twist it, there’s no such thing as a good rich person, but Beyonce is minimally responsible for anyone’s current plight. Jay-Z funds terrible things but he’s not a Koch, a Trump, the head of an oil company, etc.