robryk @robryk@qoto.org

@lcamtuf @_dm

Would you say the same about "killing" and "killing of civilians"?

@lcamtuf @_dm

The decisions to kill people uninvolved in attacking you (or decisions around tradeoffs between killing those involved and not killing those uninvolved) are separate from the decision to wage war. Do you think the same things apply to these decisions too (i.e. that without something novel these choices are a somewhat inevitable rut)?

@ErikvanStraten @sleevi

I don't think that would help (at least for https) in face of two different certs for the same domain and with different properties-intended-to-decide-on-trust, because same site policies would consider entities presenting those two certs to fully trust each other.

In face of that ISTM that you'd rather have any such properties tied to the domain name and not a cert (with an expiry, too). Doing that should be way simpler and can be done independently of the CA system we have now.

@grimalkina

An insidious variant is: how did we choose to observe at all?

@sleevi

This strongly resembles the attitude of presenting One More Policy And Its Enforcement as a solution to some problem without considering the question of the provenance of the policy and whether it can be assembled from individual fragments that single humans will have enough context to create.

It would be nice to have some way of succinctly talking about problems of these shapes (for starters, naming them).

Totally random: videos on https://www.youtube.com/@Shaddicus give a perspective on powerplant operations that's otherwise hard to get (for me they explained a few things that I found surprising in simulators).

@_thegeoff

I would rather suspect that such acceleration would come from the amount of entropy that was emitted when doing so (or rather, due to the net entropy increase). If the cooling mechanism was as efficient as possible, that amount would have been zero.

We could have emitted the same amount of entropy by generating the same amount of heat (well, slightly less) from zero entropy energy.

@kravietz

Zgadzam się z wszystkim poza argumentacją w drugim paragrafie. W wielu podobnych sytuacjach oburzanie się na zloczyńcow ma sens, bo są oni między nami i produkowanie powszechnego braku akceptacji dla akceptacji ich postępowania pomaga (np. w przypadku rabunków dziejących się w miejscu które "ma do tego predyspozycje"). Tutaj nie ma to sensu, bo społeczny brak akceptacji nic nie zmienia.

@aeva

I wrap my ponytail around my head and clip the end, which I haven't seen anyone mentioning (and it took me some time before I realized that it's an option easier than a bun).

I prevent myself from becoming lost in thought when showering by having a playlist of roughly correct duration, so that I can intuitively tell how much time I have "left" based on which song is playing.

@mark

If it's slow and still dangerous, it might be worse than fast danger (IOW threshold for dangerous might be higher for slow things).

@mark

I'm thinking of it as a notation that invokes a "method" on the commit with a potential argument.

@mark @b0rk

Potential mnemonic: x^N is the N-th parent of x (not N-th recursively, but N-th from the list of parents, 1-indexed). I would find it very weird if that was written N^x instead.

@ruarl @grimalkina

I was nearly never taught the history of any discovery in school. When I was (e.g. nonexistence of aether or phlogiston) the whole thing was presented backward, so that often it was hard to realize that these weird hypotheses that turned out false were actually reasonable. I consider this a significant failing of the education system I've experienced and I think it's related to the problem you're pointing out (because it leaves people with less of an idea how discoveries happened).

@logicalerror that depends. It's hard to make a trike that will be stable in the kinds of turns you can easily make on a bike.

@b0rk the caret notation for parent of a commit (very useful for interactive rebase or when you want to be explicit about what you are diffing)

@0xabad1dea

An article I've found on the topic: https://nltimes.nl/2024/04/15/ns-trains-halt-brief-protest-conductor-viciously-beaten

Not that the poor gal was beaten by a _group_.

@ZachWeinersmith

Ah, and in an area where this becomes somewhat more confusing -- probability -- I found that describing everything in terms of stochastic "experiments" and then talking about random variables corresponding to some values observed during the experiment is the least confusing approach.

The area where IMO we don't have good terminology for this is partial differential equations. There, we very often talk about curves through some space and functions applies to e.g. the point the curve provides and its tangent. We sadly create a ton of confusion by not naming the arguments to that function (rather using `curve(t)` and `curve'(t)` in their place). I think this is an area where talking about (in)dependent variables is a reasonable crutch for the ambiguity that's typically introduced.

@ZachWeinersmith

I find this way of thinking about functions very confusing. The way I imagined functions is that they're a "computational" primitive that takes some inputs and gives some outputs back. This model admits natural composition, reasonably natural argmax&al and inverses. In it the notion of dependence of variables is, depending on your pov, either trivial or not really a thing.