Subscript5676

I know Lemmy hates AI with a fiery passion (and I too hate it for various reasons), but the ability to make this sort of prediction in a way far more stable than whatever else came before with natural language processing (fancy term of the day for those who havem’t heard of it), and however inefficiently built and ran it is, is useful if you can nudge it enough in a certain direction. It can’t do functional things reliably, but if you contain it to only parse human language and extract very specific information, show it in a machine-parsable way, and then use that as input for something you can program, you’ve essentially built something that feels like it can understand you in human language for a handful of tasks and carry out those tasks (even if the carrying out part isn’t actually done by an LLM). So pedantically, it’s not AI, but most people not in tech don’t know or care about the difference. It’s all magic all the way down like how computers should just magically do what they’re thinking of. That’s not changed.

My point though, and this isn’t targeting you specifically dear OC, is that we can circlejerk all we want here, but echoing this oversimplification of what LLMs can do is pretty irrelevant to the bigger discourse. Call these companies out on their practices! Their hypocrisy! Their indifference to the collapse of our biosphere, human suffering, letting the most vulnerable to hang high and dry!

Tech is a tool, and if our best argument is calling a tool useless when it’s demonstrably useful in specific ways, we’re only making a fool of ourselves, turning people away from us and discouraging others from listening to us.

But if your goal is to feel good by letting one out, please be my guest.

Peace

No offense to you, but I’m assuming your mention of integrals here are those that you’d frequently encounter in a regular course of calculus in the English-speaking world (little tidbit that I came across a while ago is that universities in a number of countries don’t make a distinction between real analysis and calculus). But I studied in NA, so I can come at your ask from this angle.

To make it perfectly clear though: real analysis (and some beyond) and calculus are looking at the same thing, but coming at it from different angles. Calculus focuses on what’s computable, to have the ability to look at how real values (as in, real numbers) change given a particular function. OTOH, real analysis is, as the name suggests, a study of real numbers, this nebulous idea of “distance between numbers along with other distance-y properties” that we call a space, and the functions that can act in this space.

Here’s an example of the difference in treatment.

In calculus, the idea of differentiability is usually introduced as “the tangent at a point”. And that’s a fairly easily understood idea, and it’s fine to gloss over the details when most of the functions that you will come across and use are going to be differentiable functions.

In real analysis, which is usually an early class in pure mathematics, the treatment is a lot more rigourous: you have to very explicitly define what something is, and it becomes your framework to prove that something IS the thing you’ve defined. The “tangent on a point” isn’t lost, but the way it’s described leaves you with no space for vague interpretations of what’s considered differentiable or not.

The same goes for integrability. And yes there are different ways to think about inevitability to expand on the types of functions that would be considered integrable. In calculus, the Riemannian method is likely the only method that one will ever see. And that’s fine! It’s easy, if not tedious, to compute! And it’s already incredibly useful. Most functions that a student in calculus will ever have to integrate are all continuous anyways.

But Lesbesgue was able to create a definition of an integral that allows us to handle even certain non-continuous functions. The problem? It’s not as easily computable as there isn’t all the derivative rules common in calculus (calculus is a “method of calculation”), even though the intuitive intepretation of the Lesbesgue integral is that instead of slicing the area under the curve downwards, you slice sidewards!

Hopefully that’s easy enough to follow, but let me know if you’d like me to explain further. Trying to grok this old part of my brain here for this.

Edit: I’m adding this on because I think I may have just recalled a very fundamental knowledge with regards to measure theory, that all non-negative functions defined in some measurable space are all integrable using the measure. To be really fair, we straight up just defined integrability to be that, because, and I’m being veeeerrry handwavy here, if you can measure parts of the range of a function in smaller pieces in some way, then you could just add the parts up. A measurable space as just some space where you can put some kind of measurement (think of how you measure things) on a collection of points in some space, think a bunch of numbers.

How easily can we make up methods of calculation that would allow us to take any such function, apply some symbolic manipulation, and arrive at the integral, though, is a completely different ask, and I don’t yet know if there’s effort being put in here.

Oh! I know something that can mess you up even more!

For those who don’t know what this book’s about:

The textbook “Principles of Mathematical Analysis”, by Walter Rudin, is considered a “classic” text on real analysis, the subject that uses rigorous deductive logic to put calculus on a firm foundation.

This book is lovingly called “Baby Rudin”, because it’s considered an entry-level book that undergraduates can take in their first 3 years, and Rudin also wrote 2 more books that are a large extension of the basic ideas in Baby Rudin, as in, more advanced, covering topics like Measure Theory (one way this is useful is as a framework to have more ways to deal with integrals) and Lesbesgue Integration (and this is an introductory example and application of Measure Theory) in “Papa Rudin”, and Functional Analysis in “Grandpa Rudin” (fancy phrase of the day: infinite-dimensional spaces!).

Please don’t ask further though. Many tears have been shed. Many trees were also harmed in the process (from all the papers that were used for sketching out ideas or proofs).

Yup, keep taking the blue pill.

Edit: Okay, I did not know the meaning’s kinda flipped on the current political parlance, so I thought I’d clarify; yeah, keep downing the shovelled reality where “nobody wants to use Canada Post”, instead of thinking about the generations of governments that have continually failed to update and keep Canada Post relevant, while allowing private companies to eat that pie and even allow people with a clear conflict of interest to have a strong influence over Canada Post’s management. So yeah, it’s the original “blue pill” from The Matrix.

Axios existed before fetch (and iirc fetch was designed with axios in mind) and comes with bells and whistles that you’d want to have when building against JSON-based API servers. It’s popular for a good reason, which tbf is a rare rnough phenomenon these days in general.

I’ve seen them use Qualtrics before so I wouldn’t be surprised.

What I am suspicious about tho is that official accounts weren’t linked.

What is this activity you call "looking for my cursor?

On my computer, I summon my cursor.

This ad is brought to you by the Cursor Follows Focus Gang

People always think of Japan and their poor salarypeople, sleeping in the train, missing their stop, and have to be waken up later and hope they aren’t on the last train. How sad it is that they have to work so late till night to take a late night train home.

What they didn’t think of is that they have a train to sleep in. Not putting aside the sometimes brutal work culture in Japan, but a lot of people can sleep on their way to work and back. Not us.

Had a terrible night and lack sleep? Drive to work. Kids throwing a hissy fit and you’re exhausted dealing with em? Drive em to school. Had a busy or terrible day at work? Drive back home.

As someone who’s been playing the game for 2 3 years, and was playing it literally yesterday, I don’t get what you’re saying. What did they change completely?

God fuck this timeline smh

I’m one of those people done in by the minio rugpull. I see RustFS there, but they’re done a lot of things on their licensing front incredibly similarly to what minio did. And that scares me.

I also saw a Github issue where someone was asking what’s their say on whether they’ll ever pull a minio, and their answer was basically, “We don’t plan to. Just trust us bro.”

I know what I’m not using.

I, for one, don’t see it as a mutually exclusive choice: why can’t we do both? There’s an immediate threat and a looming one, it’s not one or the other here. I can accept that we have to pump out more fossil fuel in the short term given our circumstances, but little is being done to move the needle on the general dependence of fossil fuels.

Okay that’s good to hear, even if it’s an aboutface from them.

Having the fire dept fight against bike lanes and all that is also a problem in Ontario. And they say the exact same things too. It’s insane that they can say such cognitively dissonant things; the damn traffic jam is gonna cost people’s lives too if they’re stuck in traffic, and what the fuck is their argument for that?

If they argue that their fat ass vehicles can’t get into small spaces, tell them to fucking stop buying these shit from the US and look at how other countries run their show; get smaller vehicles and drive more vehicles out when needed, and not haul every tool under the sun for every emergency. And heck! Protection for bike lanes is generally nothing to their giant ass vehicles anyways!

And they need to also stop with the baseless mindset of “hurdurr we’re different from other countries” and start understanding what that difference is and why they’re there, and see that we’re really not that different aside from how we’ve decided to fucking infest everyone’s lives with cars.

Let the cities do things to get as many cars off the streets, and emergency services would then have less cars to deal with. If that doesn’t sound reasonable to them, tell them they are part of their problems aside from being everyone else’s.

FFS

I read about Wales trying to pass a Truth Law on MPs not too long ago and wonder if we should push for the same. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/welsh-politicians-lying-vote-1.7192025

While looking for that article, I came across this: https://politicalhonesty.ca/ and https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-6679

Something’s being done!

Dammit! I thought they’d pay me 10x the price instead to add the game to my library.

overflow: visible;

So it sounds like you want to keep using Quillpad, and so you’re stuck with the folder structure, which is no subfolders, that Quillpad implicitly requires.

It kinda sounds like you need some way to “tag” your notes so that whatever application you’re using would pick those up and be able to give you all notes with a particular “tag” in a view.

If that’s the case, Obsidian can do that. You can keep the current folder structure (of just being a flat folder), and add tags to your notes (e.g. #my_tag). Then, instead of using the default file viewer, you’d look at files via tags. The only problem, though, is I’m not sure if there’s a particular view that can do that.

And no, Vim wouldn’t do what you want either, at least OOTB, cause it’s just an editor and not a file organizer or indexer. Pretty sure that applies to Emacs as well. You’d need some plugin that would do that, and I don’t think I’ve heard of one that would do this.

Not sure if I understood what you mean by “notebook”, cause if you want your notes to subdivide, then isn’t that what a folder can do?

Just to add to the many answers we already have here, if not summarize a little bit.

Anime in general English parlance refers to Japanese animation, though in recent years, it has slowly changed from the product of a country to a style that refers to the popular animation style produced in Japan. It’s why we’re hearing phrases like “anime-styled” becoming more and more often.

A number of well-known / popular games playable in the English-speaking world these days, with anime-styled characters, aren’t from Japan, Genshin being one of the prime examples, from China, and there’s those like Blue Archive, from South Korea (though iirc they get a mix of South Koreans and Japanese illustrators for their assets). Japanese pop culture has had a strong influence on many Chinese and South Korean youths over long enough to result in the creation of companies specialized in making anime-styled games and even the “anime” we know of (some people have mentioned a few in other comments). A lot of the times though, these anime don’t really get as much attention from English audiences, unless you’re in a circle who’s attentive to that side of the market.

That said though, I’ve had people argue with me over the definitely of “anime” itself, saying that it should just be “animation”. To those, they aren’t wrong if they look simply at etymology and not what’s evocated in anime-watchers’ minds at the mention of anime. To be fair though, the line does start to get murky. I mean, take a look at this list I just looked up: https://whatnerd.com/best-non-japanese-anime-series/.

It’s IMO from here, but Japanese anime has a few distinctive features: generally heavier use of detailed backgrounds, and scenes that prioritizes raw art prowess over animation techniques. There’s also the fact that voice acting is just a huge scene in Japan, and so there’s a lot of good talent that comes up, whereas everywhere else, the scene is rather limited. Underlying the success of anime is manga and (light) novels, which is also a really active industry in Japan. Comics are just quite limited elsewhere.