musingsole boosted

@musingsole Rising tides lift all boats unless those boats are tied too well that they can't rise along!

musingsole boosted

That time the USA accused russia of chemical warfare but it turned out just to be Bee shit...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_r

I always argued rising tides lift all boats until I realized how few of my friends own boats.

musingsole boosted
musingsole boosted

are there soc devices which can wakeup from RTC? i need a linux board which wakes up once a day, do some stuff and goes back to sleep

(anything else running linux would also be fine, but then i'd finally have an excuse to buy pine64 stuff ;)

musingsole boosted
musingsole boosted
musingsole boosted

@musingsole Largely because python offers a suit of tools that make the peripheral work much easier. All the greatest algorithmic trading tools appeared to be in python.

That said python can (as I recently did) acheive the performance, its not incapable of it. It just makes the process more painful than it needs to be in other languages.. even another high level language that allows for easier shared variables between threads would have solved the problem.

The idea that C is noticeably more performant is a bit of a myth. I code in C often and there are many good reasons to pick C, namely low level access to hardware, and it is the more direct and natural way to do GPGPU for certain types of algorithms... but outside of those two points it really isnt something I would pick for performance reasons as you really arent going to see any noticeable performance gain from C over many other high level languages **if** you code it right.

@freemo

Isn't needing processor power normally what causes a migration to say C from python? That said, I feel your pain. But I'm curious to understand why your wrestling with python on it's weaker fronts?

@trinsec

In response to: ‘Well, if you were allowed guns and are in a bad neighbourhood… then those bad hoodlums will have a bigger chance of carrying guns as well, escalating the situation and possibly putting you in a worse position.’

A possible alternative, explaining narrative: Proliferated access to low-power firearms can be seen as a barrier to entry for any violent crime. If you’re looking to use crime as a means to an end, you have to invest in that much more power (more people and/or stronger weapons). And there’s a degree of Mutually Assured Destruction with each level of firearms introduced. All that is to say it seems to create a downward pressure on using force as a means to an end because it becomes more expensive to do so at the same pay-off.

@servant_of_the_anime_avatars

Now come on! If that's true, it's because you're not looking at many python projects. There is stuff out there written up and down with python from youtube to my personal little roverbot. There's gonna be a quality python program out there that capture in some sort of beautiful, unassailable clarity its authors intent can convey it with equal power to a new reader or processor alike.

musingsole boosted

@servant_of_the_anime_avatars

Just as correlation isnt how statisticians test for causation with regards to showing guns have a negative effect we cant use it to show a positive effect either.

So while your counter examples do hint at the fact that the correlation isnt implying causation it is mostly just bad statistical reasoning in the same way trinsec's assertion is.

What you need to argue statistical causality formally is a causation test, the most common and simple of these being the Granger Causality Test.

A causality test does not lot, and should not, compare absolute numbers in the way both of you are doing. What they look at is how a change in the theorized causative property (in this case the strictness of gun laws) is **followed by** a change in the observed property (in this case homicides, deaths, rape cases, or generally violent crimes)... If we find that a change in one often leads to a change in the other in the months that follow (how long into the future you look is important) then you can show causation.

In fact I have previously discussed this very topic with @hansw and you can find my explanation of Granger Causality here as it applies to guns along with some examples of it being demonstrated in several major countries that had changes in gun policy. The evidence is strong that stricter gun policies lead to more homicide and violence. I've attached the images from that post here all of which show examples of Granger Causality demonstrating a causative link between stricter gun laws and more homicide/violence.

qoto.org/@freemo/1037666922745

@mur2501 @trinsec

musingsole boosted

@Electronics

I wanted to share a write up I did not to long ago explaining circuit duals with a specific focus on magnetic circuits. They behave the same as an electric circuit in the sense that anything you can do with an electric circuit there is an equivalent way to do it with a magnetic circuit. A magnetic circuit is a circuit that uses the magnetic fields propagating through “wires” rather than electric fields. It’s a very cool idea and worth a read, though all the usual electric concepts are flipped, for example instead of talking about electromotive force (EMF/voltage) you would use magnetomotive force instead (MMF) as filling the same function as voltage in an electric circuit.

Let me know what you think, this tutorial was a week long effort to write.

jeffreyfreeman.me/an-indepth-l

@General

musingsole boosted

@cy @freemo @olamundo

The pedo-angle never occurred to me as to why adoption systems are so strict. I just accepted it and didn't think on an understandable cause. Thank you :)

musingsole boosted

@musingsole @freemo @olamundo Orphans have the problem that exploitive parents looking for slave labor or unwilling fetish fuel like to snatch kids up in bulk. Not really a fault of the orphanages, who try pretty hard to ensure parents are legit with the extremely limited budget that they have. More funding to child protective services would really help there, more than going after orphanages I think.

What we need is not more parents snatching kids out of orphanages, but more oversight and checks to the power parents hold over their children. You shouldn’t have the power to abuse children and get away with it, not even if you try to call it “raising your own children” to scare people away from saving them from you.

Either that or orphanages designed to raise children themselves, not just temporarily house them until some rando comes along looking for more fodder to feed to their death bondage cult they call Christianity. At least for orphanages, there’s some public oversight.

musingsole boosted

@Electronics

I wanted to share my favorite circuit simulator to the electronics group. It isnt the most advanced and it wont replace professional tools. But its great at modeling semi-ideal components with an epic way of visualizing current and voltage that just makes it an amazing tool at getting a feeling for how circuits actually work.

Everyone should check it out and play with it, you wont regret it.

falstad.com/circuit/

@cy @freemo @olamundo

> Can human beings that do/don't love each other romanticly, that do/don't have sex with each other, take care of another human being that may be or not be the offspring of said human beings?

That's obviously true in countless variations. But it's also an abnormal situation by it's nature. Any particular arrangement after the average situation of parents raising their own children would itself be so minuscule of a statistic that it's broadly only worth talking about at a societal level under one category: orphans. And orphanages certainly exist that are staffed by individuals who would otherwise be strangers. Though no one seems to be advocating these situations as an ideal childhood.

Show more
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.