Fuck you very much, there's a lot of love shared on this site...
-
Why the fuck are all you people letting Dicsourse send you email?
That was a carryover from CS, which sent useful emails.
I never changed the setting, but I have a gmail rule to instantly archive them and never show them to me. I get a small kick out of knowing I'm wasting Discourse's time.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
I get a small kick out of knowing I'm wasting Discourse's time.
If you ever get tired of that, come over here. I'll give you a big kick.
-
-
I set up a new email address for my account here, and turned off all email notofications, and I still get the occasional daily digest from time to time, because apparently "don't send me any mail" means "send me mail" in discodeveloper--ese...
-
I set up a new email address for my account here, and turned off all email notofications, and I still get the occasional daily digest from time to time, because apparently "don't send me any mail" means "send me mail" in discodeveloper--ese...
You sure you don't have a bot or something using the same email?
-
Yes, my bot has a seperate empty new email address just for it. (I wonder if it gets digests too..)
-
-
Yes, my bot has a seperate empty new email address just for it. (I wonder if it gets digests too..)
Shoulda used a mailinator address, I guess.
-
@tar said:
Yes, my bot has a seperate empty new email address just for it. (I wonder if it gets digests too..)
Shoulda used a mailinator address, I guess.
Idea:
- Set up a shared Mailinator address
- Code various bots who will respond differently to the same input
- Have them all monitor that same inbox
Variants:
- Have them delete the message after reading it, to create fun race conditions for no reason
- Set up many-to-many bots to boxes so you'll literally never know which box will respond to any given input
-
Even more fun:
- Set up the mailbox as a distribution list, but each time it sends out an email blast, it sends it out to a random subset of the bots that monitor it.
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
random subset
Can my implementation use a random empty set instead? I feel like that would be easier to implement.
-
-
-
Is the empty set a subset of itself?
Filed under: paging @godel
Of course it is. Not a strict subset, of course. Every set is a subset of itself.
You're thinking of sets containing sets which may or may not contain themselves, which is something entirely different from subsetting.
-
I have no idea what you two are babbling about, but if it's a flamewar in the making, I'm all set for that!
-
-
Do I really have to ruin every lame attempt at a joke with disclaimers?
-
I have been variedly accused of not having a sense of humour or having a very strange sense of humour.
-
I have been variedly accused of not having a sense of humour or having a very strange sense of humour.
It's ok, I've been accused of making shit jokes.
-
sets containing sets
How many sets could the empty set set, if the empty set could set sets?
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
random subset
Can my implementation use a random empty set instead? I feel like that would be easier to implement.
As long as it's truly random.
-
Do I really have to ruin every lame attempt at a joke with disclaimers?
No, you have to ruin every lame attempt at a joke with citations.
Citation: some dumb shit BraFox said.
-
@Onyx said:
It's ok, I've been accused of making shit jokes.
This shit walks into a bar....
And orders a Budweiser and then gets arrested for cannibalism.
-
If a horse drinking horse piss were cannibalism, Bear Grylls would be in a lot of trouble.