robryk @robryk@qoto.org
I enjoy things around information theory (and data compression), complexity theory (and cryptography), read hard scifi, currently work on weird ML (we'll see how it goes), am somewhat literal minded and have approximate knowledge of random things. I like when statements have truth values, and when things can be described simply (which is not exactly the same as shortly) and yet have interesting properties.
I live in the largest city of Switzerland (and yet have cow and sheep pastures and a swimmable lake within a few hundred meters of my place :)). I speak Polish, English, German, and can understand simple Swiss German and French.
If in doubt, please err on the side of being direct with me. I very much appreciate when people tell me that I'm being inaccurate. I think that satisfying people's curiosity is the most important thing I could be doing (and usually enjoy doing it). I am normally terse in my writing and would appreciate requests to verbosify.
I appreciate it if my grammar or style is corrected (in any of the languages I use here).
Joined Nov 2020
@koakuma in all of these cases: how fine are you with lock-free unless scheduler has been extremely unfair (in which case it may block)?
I wonder how much time will pass until I get the rest of the setup for problem 17 from https://www.iypt.org/problems/problems-iypt-2024/
I was recently thinking about this: we believe that clock domain crossing gadgets can get rid of xs, as long as the fraction of time the input is an x is small enough (because otherwise they would produce xs when actually used as clock domain boundaries). So, have people tried to do circuits with areas that are not sync in any normal way to a clock, but still preserve the "is rarely x" property on their outputs (though not necessarily internal signals)?
(It does seem to offer at very most few benefits, but what I'm after is a succinct argument for why that's e.g. always majorized by some more conventional circuit.)
@delroth ok, that at least makes it clearer, but doesn't make English phrasing any less comical.
@delroth what does it say in German or French?
@koakuma btw an interesting special case is when this cas will never see conflicting updates (only possibly updates that have already been applied in the past). This special case is way simpler, but still has the counter overflow problem
@koakuma thanks for an interesting problem to think about, which I hopefully will over the next week or so
@skry @esther@strangeobject.space @vonneudeck@hachyderm.io
I guess they meant proton&co, the wrappers around wine that steam uses.
One thing that people do sometimes is that they self-boost toots that were unlisted (e.g. because they were deep in a reply chain under something unlisted), so that they appear once in the public timeline (and/or on their "toots" list instead of only "toots and replies").
("Unlisted" means technically that as:Public is not in the `to` field, but in the `cc` field.)
I'd've been really surprised if the warning were about cabin pressure itself. I rather expect that they were of the form "the pressurization system has to work way to hard to maintain this pressure difference, something is likely leaking there". I'll be curious to read the NTSB report when it comes out.
@koakuma Actually, I think one can do with just one shared "buffer", at least in the world where you can fit a counter of operations in half of the CAS word -- while filling the buffer, which is composed of <prev version, word> pairs, you CAS its elements so that you start failing if there was an intervening update.
Why do x-ray emitters present typical lamp current as an important metric? (E.g. on faceplate) Its relation to luminosity depends greatly on emitter geometry, so is emitter-specific.
@koakuma without memory linear in the number of threads that could be involved?
@bhaugen do your hearing aids support induction loop sound reception? If so, you can have the audio transmitted into a coil that you wear like a necklace. There are ready-made devices that do that, but making it yourself would only involve making a necklace coil of correct impedance.
I don't have any practical experience with these setups though, so might not know about some unobvious annoyances.
Usually squash and merge: when bisect points at a squashed commit or a merge commit one gets much less information (so merge is somewhat better than squash, because you _might_ get a commit on the merged-in branch as a result).
Rebase is much better, _as long as the project wants all commits on the main branch to actually build. If that's not the case, it's the worst (but then the notion of a commit as a version of the software is very degenerated anyway).
@b0rk A difference that was meaningful for me a few times is that they differ in the flavor and amount of suffering one gets to experience during bisection.
Zaufanie do SORów nie bierze się IMO z wyników, ale z (braku) nieuzasadnionych porażek. Jeśli to prawda, to to też jest jakaś postać zaufania do procesu a nie do samych skutków.
I enjoy things around information theory (and data compression), complexity theory (and cryptography), read hard scifi, currently work on weird ML (we'll see how it goes), am somewhat literal minded and have approximate knowledge of random things. I like when statements have truth values, and when things can be described simply (which is not exactly the same as shortly) and yet have interesting properties.
I live in the largest city of Switzerland (and yet have cow and sheep pastures and a swimmable lake within a few hundred meters of my place :)). I speak Polish, English, German, and can understand simple Swiss German and French.
If in doubt, please err on the side of being direct with me. I very much appreciate when people tell me that I'm being inaccurate. I think that satisfying people's curiosity is the most important thing I could be doing (and usually enjoy doing it). I am normally terse in my writing and would appreciate requests to verbosify.
I appreciate it if my grammar or style is corrected (in any of the languages I use here).
Joined Nov 2020
