The Official Status Thread
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Come to think of it, that must be why there are
' '
values in some of the fields, instead of actual nulls.One thing you could do on the SQL side is
COALESCE
those nullable values with some value that doesn't occur in the data ('***FOOBAR***'
for the sake of argument) to get something that has reasonable positive semantics.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Status Thread:
And no, to anyone who doesn't know, that "literal years" comment is not a joke. I've dumped a calculated $4.5k into this shit game and get no respect.
If it would help, you could mail me $4k and the specifications of the ponies you'd like and I'll see what my nieces can come up with for you. It's a savings of $500!
-
@error said in The Official Status Thread:
Every freemium game has at its core some fundamental form of irritation. The idea generally is that you will pay for some temporary alleviation of same. It seems paradoxical, but generally the irritant is actually what brings the player back.
Occasionally, though, you find one that actually does give you the best part(s) of the game for actual free. Consider Battle Breakers, whose intro theme is 80s Awesome and you can listen to it each time you launch the game. Or you could just go get the music file and skip the game entirely. :)
-
@Parody said in The Official Status Thread:
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Status Thread:
And no, to anyone who doesn't know, that "literal years" comment is not a joke. I've dumped a calculated $4.5k into this shit game and get no respect.
If it would help, you could mail me $4k and the specifications of the ponies you'd like and I'll see what my nieces can come up with for you. It's a savings of $500!
Is this a game that could be ported to run on error_bot? Asking for a friend.
-
@error said in The Official Status Thread:
@Parody said in The Official Status Thread:
@Tsaukpaetra said in The Official Status Thread:
And no, to anyone who doesn't know, that "literal years" comment is not a joke. I've dumped a calculated $4.5k into this shit game and get no respect.
If it would help, you could mail me $4k and the specifications of the ponies you'd like and I'll see what my nieces can come up with for you. It's a savings of $500!
Is this a game that could be ported to run on error_bot? Asking for a friend.
Shouldn't be too hard. Here's some pseudo-code:
while (customer.HasMoney) { drawPicture(customer.CurrentCharacter.PrettyPicture); drawPicture(random(allCharacters).PrettyPicture); // Maybe have something happen here, like a fight or beauty contest or silly animation. // It's not all that important. CreditCardDialog.showDialog("Wasn't that fun? Insert credit card to continue."); }
-
lol skolemization is an algorithm where you find witness values (in a model) for every existentially quantified sentence in a theory to turn it into a theory without existential quantification... so I'm really not scared by that. Heck, virtually every person writing a compiler has to do something similar. :-)
Wake me when you get to large cardinals and forcing.
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Wake me when you get to large cardinals
-
@dkf said in The Official Status Thread:
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Wake me when you get to large cardinals
You know perfectly well he was talking about officials in the Roman Catholic Church.
-
@error Yes, but image searching for those brought up big red birds instead.
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Wake me when you get to large cardinals and forcing.
Is that in any way related or are you just throwing around big words? Because I’m almost 100% sure that, while being an interesting mathematical curiosity, something that’s independent of ZFC isn’t related to computing normal forms.
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Do you know what conjunctive normal form is? You really should. It's really basic CS. You know, your job.
For all those times the boss asks him to perform automated theorem proving.
-
@topspin said in The Official Status Thread:
just throwing around big words?
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
an algorithm where you find witness values (in a model) for every existentially quantified sentence in a theory to turn it into a theory without existential quantification
:yep_i_understood_some_of_them_words.rar:
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Do you know what conjunctive normal form is? You really should. It's really basic CS. You know, your job.
I'm pretty sure that anything related to "normal" is a rare occurrence for most of us, on or off the job.
-
@HardwareGeek said in The Official Status Thread:
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Do you know what conjunctive normal form is? You really should. It's really basic CS. You know, your job.
I'm pretty sure that anything related to "normal" is a rare occurrence for most of us, on or off the job.
Don't you work with Blender? You must use normals all the time.
-
@mott555 said in The Official Status Thread:
@HardwareGeek said in The Official Status Thread:
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
Do you know what conjunctive normal form is? You really should. It's really basic CS. You know, your job.
I'm pretty sure that anything related to "normal" is a rare occurrence for most of us, on or off the job.
Don't you
workplay with Blender? You must use normals all the time.I wish I worked (as in getting paid) with it. And most of the time I deal with normals indirectly, through bump maps, but yeah.
-
Status: when you come back from showering and your bitch is licking herself on your bed while staring at you...
-
Status: Wondering how many times GameStop is going to spam me about their fucking tax refund sale.
Also filling out the same dumb job application over and over and over. Instead of asking how I'm going to manage the project for the four layers of management above me, just ask if I speak Hindi so I can answer no and get my rejection quicker.
-
@topspin Um, neither was Skolemization, unless you're trying to calculate Skolem normal form (I wasn't) in order to do some sort of mathematical logical construction like forcing. Like you would with the ordinals or transitive sets (which instantly puts you in the realm of large cardinals).
-
@pie_flavor said in The Official Status Thread:
Blame the idiot documenters.
He did.
@PleegWat said in The Official Status Thread:
I blame oracle.
-
@izzion said in The Official Status Thread:
Status: Dammit, forgot to pull master before I branched off of it this morning...
Speaking of which... It's a really bad thing when you remember to
sudo apt install git-lfs
, forget to invoke the magic incantationgit lfs install
(even tho you just installed lfs) and then pull master.
-
@dkf said in The Official Status Thread:
@error Yes, but image searching for those brought up big red birds instead.
They look better...
-
@Captain said in The Official Status Thread:
@topspin Um, neither was Skolemization, unless you're trying to calculate Skolem normal form (I wasn't) in order to do some sort of mathematical logical construction like forcing. Like you would with the ordinals or transitive sets (which instantly puts you in the realm of large cardinals).
It was, however, mentioned on the Wikipedia page for CNF, which is what @error said. As far as I can tell, you only need it for first order predicate logic, not propositional logic.
-
@topspin You are correct. Skolem normal form is somewhat related to CNF, since you might/would model an existential quantifier as a disjunction of sentences about objects in the domain. SNF takes that idea a step further and just assumes that a Skolem function exists -- it's a function which picks the "right" value to witness the truth of the existential sentence, so you can get away from modeling the existential as a disjunction. (So instead of modeling Ex P(x) as (P(1) or P(2) or P(3) ...), you'd model it as something like P(s(x)), where s is the Skolem function)
If you actually want to write the Skolem function, you're in a situation where you're applying some kind of choice axiom over subsets of the domain.
-
Status: Hooray for retail therapy!
Terraria for Nintendo Switch and a pack of Decepticon MicroMasters should stave off this all-consuming depression for a few hours...
-
Status: For such a big prominent game company, it's surprising that Rockstar's update server is running on a potato. It'll download a few MB, then
-
@hungrier Update:
Yet if I retry I can probably get it to download another couple hundred MB, 10 seconds/20 MB at a time
-
Status: Bacon is not supposed to be green and fuzzy.
-
Status: Aced a midterm.
That I showed up to about half the lectures preceding, did none of the homework preceding, and sort of understood the content in the first chapter of the material (and none of the others) for.
Physics is great because everything uses a different symbol so you can bullshit the entire class as long as you have an equation sheet.
-
@HardwareGeek said in The Official Status Thread:
Status: Bacon is not supposed to be green and fuzzy.
Related: I'm pretty sure this chicken noodle soup was not orange...
-
@pie_flavor Yeah, that works up until a certain point where you, for example, run into Bra-Ket-notation.
-
@Rhywden said in The Official Status Thread:
Bra-Ket-notation
In quantum mechanics, bra–ket notation is a common notation for quantum states i.e. vectors in a complex Hilbert space on which an algebra of observables act.
Yeah, I understand some of them ... no, I don't.
-
@HardwareGeek said in The Official Status Thread:
@Rhywden said in The Official Status Thread:
Bra-Ket-notation
In quantum mechanics, bra–ket notation is a common notation for quantum states i.e. vectors in a complex Hilbert space on which an algebra of observables act.
Yeah, I understand some of them ... no, I don't.
As far as I understand it's just stupid notation for vectors and scalar products. Instead of x you write <x|, and instead of <x, y> you write <x | y>. Just because physicists hate normal conventions and have to make up their own crap all the time. See also Einstein sums, because writing Σi ai bi is too much work, so instead you write ai bi and tell everyone "that's a sum, duh!"
-
Status: Pouring rain and howling wind. Edit: With thunder and lightning. Can I stay home today and just go back to bed?
-
@hungrier
At least they're not Square-Enix, or they'd have that error message be "we're getting DDOS'd, please go cry on Reddit on our behalf"
-
Status: My phone just got update to Android 10. And it's a Huawei, of all things! Updating right now. I wonder how much stuff will blow up...
-
I went through Android 10 infowhatever. The page has an interesting gimmick - when you scroll down to "dark theme", the page automatically switches to dark theme. Normally I'd be pissed, but since it's just marketing material, I think it actually looks pretty cool.
Overall, I went through every item on the detailed list of new features, and haven't found even a single one I was excited about. 9 was revolutionary to me, all thanks to the "rotate screen" button on "home row" (what's that thing called again?). 10 is just one big meh.
Before you quote that last sentence, know that your joke isn't particularly creative.
-
@topspin said in The Official Status Thread:
@HardwareGeek said in The Official Status Thread:
@Rhywden said in The Official Status Thread:
Bra-Ket-notation
In quantum mechanics, bra–ket notation is a common notation for quantum states i.e. vectors in a complex Hilbert space on which an algebra of observables act.
Yeah, I understand some of them ... no, I don't.
As far as I understand it's just stupid notation for vectors and scalar products. Instead of x you write <x|, and instead of <x, y> you write <x | y>. Just because physicists hate normal conventions and have to make up their own crap all the time. See also Einstein sums, because writing Σi ai bi is too much work, so instead you write ai bi and tell everyone "that's a sum, duh!"
It's not stupid. It's tremendously powerful. Proof of this is too wide for the margins, however, and is left as an exercise to the reader.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in The Official Status Thread:
Proof of this is too wide for the margins
We can supply infinite scrolling margins if necessary.
-
@Gąska said in The Official Status Thread:
Status: My phone just got update to Android 10. And it's a Huawei, of all things! Updating right now. I wonder how much stuff will blow up...
I swipe top edge to bring up the drop down thingy and WTF is that? Single row of five huge ass buttons? The rest of the screen blurred way too much? Did I accidentally install iOS?
-
-
@Gąska said in The Official Status Thread:
all thanks to the "rotate screen" button on "home row" (what's that thing called again?)
That sounds like some Huawei thing. The closest I can think of is the auto-rotate/lock rotation switch in quick settings
-
@hungrier said in The Official Status Thread:
@Gąska said in The Official Status Thread:
all thanks to the "rotate screen" button on "home row" (what's that thing called again?)
That sounds like some Huawei thing. The closest I can think of is the auto-rotate/lock rotation switch in quick settings
No, actually - it should be featured in all Android 9 phones by default.
-
@Gąska TIL. I've never seen that since I just keep auto rotate turned on.
-
@Benjamin-Hall Yeah, but it's still a bit of a headscratcher if you first come across it.
For example, the first explanation I got was that it was a simplification of the form:
<m|n> = ∫ f*m fn dτ
It really does make things easier as the orthogonality condition becomes <m|n>=0, for example.
And so I thought I had understood the whole thing until I ran into:
|m><n|
Fun!
-
@Rhywden said in The Official Status Thread:
@Benjamin-Hall Yeah, but it's still a bit of a headscratcher if you first come across it.
For example, the first explanation I got was that it was a simplification of the form:
<m|n> = ∫ f*m fn dτ
It really does make things easier as the orthogonality condition becomes <m|n>=0, for example.
And so I thought I had understood the whole thing until I ran into:
|m><n|
Fun!
: Take this shelf of books. Read it cover to cover. Congratulations, you are now an expert and should be able to answer your own question.
Not a quote; I usually use that line in relation to a certain vendor's library documentation.
-
-
@Rhywden said in The Official Status Thread:
@Benjamin-Hall Yeah, but it's still a bit of a headscratcher if you first come across it.
For example, the first explanation I got was that it was a simplification of the form:
<m|n> = ∫ f*m fn dτ
It really does make things easier as the orthogonality condition becomes <m|n>=0, for example.
And so I thought I had understood the whole thing until I ran into:
|m><n|
Fun!
My first "real" quantum class was taught with bra-ket notation first. We didn't run into the integral formulation until midway through the semester (until we actually wanted to calculate the wave functions of spherical atoms, in fact). And it was wonderful. You could use symmetry arguments and basic properties to show almost every significant property and to talk about it way easier than the (ugly) coordinate-dependent integral form. It really showed the coordinate independence of QM and made the concepts way easier to deal with. I'd much rather do most things in bra-ket notation rather than integral notation. Compare |nlm> to (shamelessly stolen)
when working with the angular momentum operators: I can do
L^2|nlm> = l(l+1)|nm>
instead of writing out a bunch of integrals and doing differential equations + eigenfunctions.But then again, I like symbols. I hate numbers and math.
-
I hate this "callback based" functional programming. I feel like we're taking steps back.
"Do thing 1, then do thing 2, then do thing 3" is how humans understand flows of instructions.
"Do thing 1 and tell it to then do the thing that does thing 2 and tells it to then do the thing that does thing 3" is not.
-
@anonymous234 said in The Official Status Thread:
I hate this "callback based" functional programming.
Futures (promises and observables) and async functions are the solutions to callback hell.
@anonymous234 said in The Official Status Thread:
I feel like we're taking steps back.
@error_bot xkcd sandboxing cycle
@anonymous234 said in The Official Status Thread:
"Do thing 1 and tell it to then do the thing that does thing 2 and tells it to then do the thing that does thing 3" is not.
There is an argument to be made for decoupling thing 1 from things 2 & 3. I like dependency injection and inversion of control for this.