barsoap

@barsoap@lemm.ee

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

barsoap, (edited )

Anglos like to talk about things like “Number 5”, “Westminster”, “Whitehall”, “The White House”, etc, maybe it’s from there.

And while in Germany we wouldn’t ever refer to the President or their office as anything but “The President”, the residence is definitely Bellevue Palace. As in “The President received guest at <location>” will never be filled in with “their office”. If you said “the office” people might think it’s the boring building in the front with all their staff.

Taiwan’s presidential office not having a proper name (that I know of) Algo journalists then feel a strong urge to describe it, I’d say. And it’s indeed notable.

barsoap,

Nausea isn’t overdose but that’s a technicality, what I wanted to say is that it’s quite hard to get to nausea off a single puff no matter the nic strength because it tastes, for lack of better term, sharp, very noticeably so. Coming off low-concentration juice you’d notice before the vapour goes past your tongue.

barsoap,

Not random substances, just like diluting vodka with water is not mixing in a random substance.

barsoap,

Pure water will work for a couple of percentage points but above that will not work properly because atomisers expect a certain range of viscosity or they won’t wick properly. It’s generally a mix of propylene glycol, glycerine, and water. More glycerine means more clouds, natural sweetness, and annoying hygroscopy (i.e. you’ll get a dry mouth), while PG is an aroma carrier, less sweet, quite a bit less hygroscopic. It’s also the standard solvent for nicotine and aroma, not just vape aromas most food aromas are PG-based, too. Water is there to make the liquid less viscous and/or reduce hygroscopy of the overall mixture.

barsoap,

Would you be saying the same thing if it was about diluting vodka with water?

…because that’s what mixing vape juice with juice base is.

barsoap,

If I was making a cocktail for a friend, and, eyeballing the ratios, ended up putting too little vodka in it, would that still be tampering?

barsoap,

Pirates.

barsoap, (edited )

Americans found lots of values in Starbucks coffee because Americans have no concept of coffee that’s simultaneously black, not bitter, not acidic, and sweet. It would be wrong to blame Starbucks for that, they’re a symptom, not the cause, but yes their coffee sucks. As it does everywhere else in the US, the country that thought that percolators were a mighty fine idea.

(And yes I know you guys invented the Aeropress. Good thing, good job, good coffee (with proper beans), now also use it).

barsoap,

You can, in fact, go to Starbucks and order an Espresso. Let’s just say that it tastes as if the barrista had never drank one straight.

barsoap,

Starbucks can provide value to Americans and their coffee can suck, those two things are not mutually exclusive.

barsoap,

IEEE 754

I mean it’s an algebra, isn’t it? And it definitely was mathematicians who came up with the thing. In the same way that artists didn’t come up with the CGI colour palette.

barsoap,

It’s a wonderful world where 1 / 0 is ∞ and 1 / -0 is -∞, making a lot of high school teachers very very mad. OTOH it’s also a very strange world where x = y does not imply 1 / x = 1 / y. But it is, very emphatically, an algebra.

Mostly it’s pure numerology, at least from the POV of most of the people using it.

barsoap,

You probably are familiar with the thing, just not under that name, and not as a subject of mathematical study. I am aware that there are, at least in theory, mathematicians never expanding beyond pen+paper (and that’s fine) but TBH they’re getting kinda rare. The last time you fired up Julia you probably used them, R, possibly, Coq, it’d actually be a surprise.

They’re most widely known to trip up newbie programmers, causing excessive bug hunts and then a proud bug report stating “0.1 + 0.2 /= 0.3, that’s wrong”, to which the reply will be “nope, that’s exactly as the spec says”. The solution, to people who aren’t numerologists, is to sprinkle gratuitous amounts of epsilons everywhere.

barsoap,

Depends, I’d say. Is your set theory incomplete or inconsistent?

barsoap, (edited )

Different kinds of sugar are all sugar when they get to your gut.

Nope fruits are high in fructose while sucrose, aka table sugar, is 50:50 glucose and fructose. Fruit has the same or even worse makeup sugar-wise as HFCS, glucose can be used pretty much directly by the body while fructose needs to be processed by the liver, into fat. Evolutionary speaking that makes a lot of sense as when there’s a lot of fruit around it’s summer and you need to fatten up.

Real fruit vs. juice is a matter of fibre and satisfaction from chewing, it’s way easier to overdrink than to overeat fruit.

barsoap, (edited )

We get it you’re vegan.

Also most people are actually lactose-intolerant, the capability to retain production of lactase into adulthood is a mutation won through a lot of hardship and diarrhoea.

Side note Italy being blue explains why they have strange rules such as “no cappuccino after noon”, it’s not that it’s bad or anything it’s that many Italians can only stomach one, maybe two a day.

barsoap,

And this is exactly why I always humour tech support when they’re asking me which lights exactly are on, which colour, and their blinking patterns. I’ve already made the diagnosis yes the problem is on their end but it’s not like they have a way to know I’m not full of shit.

barsoap, (edited )

Oldie but goodie:

< > ! * ’ ’ #
^ " ` $ $ -
! * = @ $ _
% * < > ~ # 4
& [ ] . . /
| { , , SYSTEM HALTED

Waka waka bang splat tick tick hash,
Caret quote back-tick dollar dollar dash,
Bang splat equal at dollar under-score,
Percent splat waka waka tilde number four,
Ampersand bracket bracket dot dot slash,
Vertical-bar curly-bracket comma comma CRASH!

“waka” didn’t gain popularity among people, at least not among any I ever heard about, usually it’s angle bracket. I’m quite partial to ‘tic’ and ‘tac’. The rest is standard or at least common, IMO | is pipe and {} braces. * is often called asterisk or star but splat is just better. And # is most definitely not “hashtag”. Here’s an overview of what’s out in the wild.

barsoap, (edited )

That paper is yet to be peer reviewed or released.

Never doing either (release as in submit to journal) isn’t uncommon in maths, physics, and CS. Not to say that it won’t be released but it’s not a proper standard to measure papers by.

I think you are jumping into conclusion with that statement. How much can you dilute the data until it breaks again?

Quoth:

If each linear model is instead fit to the generate targets of all the preceding linear models i.e. data accumulate, then the test squared error has a finite upper bound, independent of the number of iterations. This suggests that data accumulation might be a robust solution for mitigating model collapse.

Emphasis on “finite upper bound, independent of the number of iterations” by doing nothing more than keeping the non-synthetic data around each time you ingest new synthetic data. This is an empirical study so of course it’s not proof you’ll have to wait for theorists to have their turn for that one, but it’s darn convincing and should henceforth be the null hypothesis.

Btw did you know that noone ever proved (or at least hadn’t last I checked) that reversing, determinising, reversing, and determinising again a DFA minimises it? Not proven yet widely accepted as true, crazy, isn’t it? But, wait, no, people actually proved it on a napkin. It’s not interesting enough to do a paper about.

barsoap,

It was someone different who said that. There’s a chance the authors might’ve gotten some claim wrong because their maths and/or methodology is shoddy but it’s a large and diverse set of authors so that’s unlikely. Fraud in CS empirics is generally unheard of, I mean what are you going to do when challenged, claim that the dog ate the program you ran to generate the data? There’s shenanigans about the equivalent of p-hacking especially from papers from commercial actors trying to sell stuff but that’s not the case here, either.

CS academics generally submit papers to journals more because of publish or perish than the additional value formal peer review offers. It’s on the internet, after all. By all means, if you spot something in the paper that’s wrong then be right on the internet.

barsoap, (edited )

small module nuclear reactors.

Hmm let’s see what changed since I last looked. This study seems recent, just looking at the publicly available sections:

SMRs do not represent dramatic improvements in economics compared to large reactors.

Translation: They’re way more expensive than renewables. SMRs have some advantage which are mentioned (less land usage, non-intermittency), then we have

The advanced SMRs are compared to conventional large reactors and natural gas plants,

…but not renewables+storage, which would be a good comparison point. If it looked any good they definitely would’ve included it.


Now that doesn’t mean that these things don’t make sense for Microsoft. It might e.g. simplify power distribution within datacentres to a degree that other sources just can’t, also reduce or eliminate the need for backup power, etc. But generally speaking I’m still smelling techbro BS.

barsoap, (edited )

Coal is going to stick around for certain applications for pretty much forever. What’d be interesting to see is charcoal refined to anthracite-levels of performance so applications needing that kind of grade can become carbon-neutral.

And it’s not even always railway enthusiasts operating the remaining steam locomotives btw in Poland they’re still in regular service. They phased out steam very late because of various economic reasons and once they did steam was already a nostalgic thing so they kept a depot and associated lines open. Contrast e.g. Germany where you don’t see steam in regular service but on various isolated narrow gauge sections.

barsoap, (edited )

GNU tar, at least a modern one, that is the one that happens to come with my system, won’t try to read from /dev but stdin and then complain that it’s a terminal and refuse.

Quoth POSIX on the f flag:

Use the first file operand […] as the name of the archive instead of the system-dependent default.

That is GNU is compliant, here, the default is system-dependent. f - is required to be stdin, though, so you can bunzip2 foo.tar.bz2 | tar xf - or such in a portable manner, don’t have to rely on tar having a z option (which is nonstandard) or it auto-detecting compression (even more nonstandard). What is not standard either is tar -x: Tar doesn’t take leading hyphens. Tar is one of those programs so old its command line syntax got standardised before command line syntax standards were established. OTOH it’s not nearly as bad as dd, you can interpret how tar does things in the same way as git pull: It’s a subcommand, not a flag.

barsoap, (edited )

POSIX. POSIX didn’t get designed but documented behaviour that was portable between different UNIX flavours and was then declared a standard.

If you’re annoyed by it just consider the xvf in tar xvf to be a subcommand as pull is in git pull. Tar simply has a fancy subcommand syntax. At least it’s not dd.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • megavids
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • khanakhh
  • ngwrru68w68
  • slotface
  • ethstaker
  • mdbf
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • cisconetworking
  • rosin
  • JUstTest
  • Durango
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Leos
  • tester
  • tacticalgear
  • InstantRegret
  • normalnudes
  • osvaldo12
  • cubers
  • anitta
  • modclub
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines