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/)W
Posts
9
Comments
2789
Joined
2 yr. ago

Just a smol with big opinions about AFVs and data science. The onlyfans link is a rickroll.

$|>>> Onlyfans! <<<|$

  • ... Because they tell a compelling story?

    I can have a preferred color combination (turquoise and violet) without making that color combination my entire personality. You can do the same thing with video games.

  • What? What does that have to do with it? They're not engaging with once massively popular stories, not bemoaning how they can't be obsessed with them.

  • A quite reasonable argument could be made that a battery simply sitting around is only connected to one circuit (itself thru the air) and thus there's not an "unintended" one it's also connected to that could be considered a short - but really, my unstated point this whole time is that this is not a usefully rigorously defined term. The definition on wikipedia is as close as we'll get, and it's extremely broad by it's nature.

  • (I'm sorry I hate doing these point by point breakdowns, it lacks narrative structure and flair, but I'm tired...)

    but it is small enough to be considered an open circuit for engineering purposes.

    The current flowing when you complete the circuit with with your hand is about 0.2 miliamps (measured at ~47,000Ω resistance so I rounded to 50k). If any engineer is considering that an open circuit they should be driven through the streets in a waymo I would very much like to see the application in which they consider that an open circuit because none is springing to mind (outside of clear outliers like some of the really weird switches used in high voltage electronics which I can't even remember the names of).


    Shorts are unintended low impedance paths.

    That is one type of short, yes, however if we look at the closest thing we're going to find to a broadly accepted formal definition (the one from wikipedia:)

    A short circuit is an abnormal connection between two nodes of an electric circuit intended to be at different voltages. This results in a current limited only by the Thévenin equivalent resistance of the rest of the network which can cause circuit damage, overheating, fire or explosion.

    We can see that it is not actually a requirement to have a circuit with low/no impedance; it's just a common form a short takes. The actual requirement is a circuit with lower impedance than the intended circuit. This makes sense of course: a short across a signal wire is obviously not going to dump the full potential of an entire system, only that portion which provides current to the shorting circuit. It would similarly still be considered a short if the conductor shorting the signal wire were a high-impedence resistor that was causing a false signal - so long as it's enough to trip whatever sensor is at the other end, it would be a fault caused by a short circuit. In the case of a car battery, the leakage current is part of an absurdly low current circuit (something like 30 picoamps) which you are shorting when you make contact with the terminals. The difference between a circuit with kilohms of resistance and one with near gigaohms of resistance is phenomenal.

    However at the risk of still being right, let me say that this is an incredibly pointless semantic argument to be having. Yes, technically, you are shorting the battery. In a more formal setting I probably wouldn't have phrased it like that in an effort to stave off the chance of a tedious argument like we're having right now; however this is a shitpost community so I figured brevity instead of defensive technical clarity was the ideal course of action.

    Misjudged that one, didn't I.

    (Edit: clarity, removed horny joke. This is no joking matter.)

  • You could reproduce something like it, but I'm going to stand by the assertion that the subtle color gradients that cause the "shading" effect and give the AI piece depth are realistically impossible.

    Those are all amazing but they're working with the limitations of the medium masterfully, not recreating something pre-dictated. Stupid metaphor: It's like how the graphics in windwaker still hold up while most of the other games on that platform look horrible by modern standards; they produced art that looked good on it's own instead of art that relied on you to fill in implied details.

  • No, there is absolutely current flowing when you touch both terminals, it's just an incredibly tiny amount. You can do the math yourself and see, it's a basic application of Ohms law. The formula is (I=V/R). The reason you feel the tingles from a 9 volt you lick vs one you touch with your finger is that the resistance is much lower when licked, allowing more current to be produced - but the resistance is not infinite when you touch it with your finger, it's just high enough that you do not notice the tingling from the small amount of current that results from a circuit with such high resistance (also it travels across the surface and on a much less sensitive part of your anatomy etc. etc.)

  • Yes exactly, I cannot stand the idea of you plebs learning things. How dare you even ask about this.

  • How do you mean?

  • You've put a worrying amount of thought into this.

  • It's just the common parlance. I wouldn't have done this were it a more technical setting, but this is a shitpost community - so I'll just have to beg forgiveness for my imprecision. Fortunately, should anyone go to test this by fondling their car's terminals, no harm will befall them due to my lack of strict accuracy in the description here (though they might get rebuffed by their car if it's not in the mood).

  • I'm aware - I very intentionally spared everyone the lecture on the mechanics of how this works because it is, on the whole, very boring. However if we really wanted to get into the boring technical details nobody but us cares about then yes, you are indeed shorting the battery, it's just for a ludicrously small amount of current. Ohms law (I = V/R) gives us that.

  • I meant contact both terminals at once with your bare hands.

  • Just checking: Is this a semantic argument about my use of "short"?

  • You know, I don't think I've seen this variant of the trolley problem before

  • You for sure can! Were I doing this I'd use a 3D stitch for the teeth/gums/lips and the outlines of the eye and lower jaw (probably also combined with stitching over layers of felt (or similar) to really bulk up the depth for the whole piece, especially for the horns), but it's going to be miserable to do and I really don't expect such coarse stitching to look right when done that way.

    The big issue I see is that the shading is just too gentle - most complex embroidery like this looks "cel shaded" because you can't get smooth gradients with thread, and swapping different colors of thread to produce that look ruins the stitch pattern.

    There are a handful of techniques wherein you create the stitch using a single thread on a blank piece, paint the color gradients on with dye, unravel the whole embroidery then recreate it exactly on the final piece. (I own an edo period tapestry where this was done, though it's faded to where it's extremely difficult to tell.) Needless to say it's incredibly rare for anyone to take the time to do it this way anymore

  • You can short the terminals on a car battery with your body with no issue (there's a theory that that's why you see it in movies so much - if anyone actually tries it the studio isn't giving them an idea that actually works. Same with duct-tape gags and chloroform), but it might melt the hardware and set the floor on fire which would be fun! What they should really do is connect a HV source and charge up the pole. Won't cause any lasting harm, but hopefully it'll convince them they drove a screw through a live wire.

  • The color gradients and shading would be effectively impossible, unfortunately. You could recreate the flat pattern possibly, but it just wouldn't look the same. The detailing on the mouth especially wouldn't work :(

  • You know that's a damn good point. The what-the-fuck just doesn't stop.

  • News @lemmy.world

    Trump says he won't proceed with tariffs over ownership of Greenland

    www.nbcnews.com /politics/trump-administration/live-blog/live-updates-trump-davos-greenland-europe-canada-air-force-one-rcna254575
  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    (I made) Teriyaki-glazed tuna steak!

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    First time making Liege waffles - stuck a little bit but turned out wonderful in spite of that!

  • Shitty Food Porn @lemmy.ca

    May I offer m'lady a chalice of the finest Dew?

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    It's basic, but is there anything in the world more satisfying to dice than green onions?

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    Fresh loaf of Foccia! (Turned out beautifully, if I do say so myself)

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    Garlic knots (from leftover sourdough pizza dough)

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    Chicken, spinach and parmesan omelette!

  • FoodPorn @lemmy.world

    Today in "stupid food I made" I give you: Thin-sliced, pan fried burrito with Tamagoyaki eggs and a sweet chili vinaigrette.