Subscript5676

I live in Ontario, and I feel like I’m living in a bubble, because not a single person I’ve talked to likes Drug Fraud, but Ontario voted this sack of shit thrice into the office. Everything feels like it’s in fucking shambles: the housing, healthcare, education (all the levels!); anything public aside from fucking businesses.

But then again, there’s also an insane amount of political apathy amongst my peers (I’m around 30). No one believes that their ability to vote means anything. I’m not allowed to vote (I’m a PR), and I have to find ways to tell my friends to go fucking vote. While it’s true that if shit hits the fucking roof I can always just move out, it hurts me to just watch my friends suffer, especially when a number of them are teachers and nurses, and they recount the sad episodes of the kids in schools and the patients in hospitals not getting the care they need.

In cass it’s not clear from other comments, if the site tells you either one’s wrong but not both, you can then brute force and try out a bunch of usernames and passwords to effectively farm for both: those that say “wrong username” means that the password is valid, while those that say “wrong password” means you got the username that’s in the system.

Once you’ve collected them, the rest is just trying out every password for every user.

So… while this seems weird for a person, it is very much intentional.

Edit after several comments: I don’t know why it’s hard for people to look at the OP, take it for what it is, and argue for the sake of the argument, rather than claiming that something’s impossible because of common or correct technical practices.

I know Lemmy hates AI with a fiery passion (and I too hate it for various reasons), but the ability to make this sort of prediction in a way far more stable than whatever else came before with natural language processing (fancy term of the day for those who havem’t heard of it), and however inefficiently built and ran it is, is useful if you can nudge it enough in a certain direction. It can’t do functional things reliably, but if you contain it to only parse human language and extract very specific information, show it in a machine-parsable way, and then use that as input for something you can program, you’ve essentially built something that feels like it can understand you in human language for a handful of tasks and carry out those tasks (even if the carrying out part isn’t actually done by an LLM). So pedantically, it’s not AI, but most people not in tech don’t know or care about the difference. It’s all magic all the way down like how computers should just magically do what they’re thinking of. That’s not changed.

My point though, and this isn’t targeting you specifically dear OC, is that we can circlejerk all we want here, but echoing this oversimplification of what LLMs can do is pretty irrelevant to the bigger discourse. Call these companies out on their practices! Their hypocrisy! Their indifference to the collapse of our biosphere, human suffering, letting the most vulnerable to hang high and dry!

Tech is a tool, and if our best argument is calling a tool useless when it’s demonstrably useful in specific ways, we’re only making a fool of ourselves, turning people away from us and discouraging others from listening to us.

But if your goal is to feel good by letting one out, please be my guest.

Peace

No offense to you, but I’m assuming your mention of integrals here are those that you’d frequently encounter in a regular course of calculus in the English-speaking world (little tidbit that I came across a while ago is that universities in a number of countries don’t make a distinction between real analysis and calculus). But I studied in NA, so I can come at your ask from this angle.

To make it perfectly clear though: real analysis (and some beyond) and calculus are looking at the same thing, but coming at it from different angles. Calculus focuses on what’s computable, to have the ability to look at how real values (as in, real numbers) change given a particular function. OTOH, real analysis is, as the name suggests, a study of real numbers, this nebulous idea of “distance between numbers along with other distance-y properties” that we call a space, and the functions that can act in this space.

Here’s an example of the difference in treatment.

In calculus, the idea of differentiability is usually introduced as “the tangent at a point”. And that’s a fairly easily understood idea, and it’s fine to gloss over the details when most of the functions that you will come across and use are going to be differentiable functions.

In real analysis, which is usually an early class in pure mathematics, the treatment is a lot more rigourous: you have to very explicitly define what something is, and it becomes your framework to prove that something IS the thing you’ve defined. The “tangent on a point” isn’t lost, but the way it’s described leaves you with no space for vague interpretations of what’s considered differentiable or not.

The same goes for integrability. And yes there are different ways to think about inevitability to expand on the types of functions that would be considered integrable. In calculus, the Riemannian method is likely the only method that one will ever see. And that’s fine! It’s easy, if not tedious, to compute! And it’s already incredibly useful. Most functions that a student in calculus will ever have to integrate are all continuous anyways.

But Lesbesgue was able to create a definition of an integral that allows us to handle even certain non-continuous functions. The problem? It’s not as easily computable as there isn’t all the derivative rules common in calculus (calculus is a “method of calculation”), even though the intuitive intepretation of the Lesbesgue integral is that instead of slicing the area under the curve downwards, you slice sidewards!

Hopefully that’s easy enough to follow, but let me know if you’d like me to explain further. Trying to grok this old part of my brain here for this.

Edit: I’m adding this on because I think I may have just recalled a very fundamental knowledge with regards to measure theory, that all non-negative functions defined in some measurable space are all integrable using the measure. To be really fair, we straight up just defined integrability to be that, because, and I’m being veeeerrry handwavy here, if you can measure parts of the range of a function in smaller pieces in some way, then you could just add the parts up. A measurable space as just some space where you can put some kind of measurement (think of how you measure things) on a collection of points in some space, think a bunch of numbers.

How easily can we make up methods of calculation that would allow us to take any such function, apply some symbolic manipulation, and arrive at the integral, though, is a completely different ask, and I don’t yet know if there’s effort being put in here.

Oh! I know something that can mess you up even more!

For those who don’t know what this book’s about:

The textbook “Principles of Mathematical Analysis”, by Walter Rudin, is considered a “classic” text on real analysis, the subject that uses rigorous deductive logic to put calculus on a firm foundation.

This book is lovingly called “Baby Rudin”, because it’s considered an entry-level book that undergraduates can take in their first 3 years, and Rudin also wrote 2 more books that are a large extension of the basic ideas in Baby Rudin, as in, more advanced, covering topics like Measure Theory (one way this is useful is as a framework to have more ways to deal with integrals) and Lesbesgue Integration (and this is an introductory example and application of Measure Theory) in “Papa Rudin”, and Functional Analysis in “Grandpa Rudin” (fancy phrase of the day: infinite-dimensional spaces!).

Please don’t ask further though. Many tears have been shed. Many trees were also harmed in the process (from all the papers that were used for sketching out ideas or proofs).

Axios existed before fetch (and iirc fetch was designed with axios in mind) and comes with bells and whistles that you’d want to have when building against JSON-based API servers. It’s popular for a good reason, which tbf is a rare rnough phenomenon these days in general.

What is this activity you call "looking for my cursor?

On my computer, I summon my cursor.

This ad is brought to you by the Cursor Follows Focus Gang

Dammit! I thought they’d pay me 10x the price instead to add the game to my library.

overflow: visible;

So it sounds like you want to keep using Quillpad, and so you’re stuck with the folder structure, which is no subfolders, that Quillpad implicitly requires.

It kinda sounds like you need some way to “tag” your notes so that whatever application you’re using would pick those up and be able to give you all notes with a particular “tag” in a view.

If that’s the case, Obsidian can do that. You can keep the current folder structure (of just being a flat folder), and add tags to your notes (e.g. #my_tag). Then, instead of using the default file viewer, you’d look at files via tags. The only problem, though, is I’m not sure if there’s a particular view that can do that.

And no, Vim wouldn’t do what you want either, at least OOTB, cause it’s just an editor and not a file organizer or indexer. Pretty sure that applies to Emacs as well. You’d need some plugin that would do that, and I don’t think I’ve heard of one that would do this.

Not sure if I understood what you mean by “notebook”, cause if you want your notes to subdivide, then isn’t that what a folder can do?

Just to add to the many answers we already have here, if not summarize a little bit.

Anime in general English parlance refers to Japanese animation, though in recent years, it has slowly changed from the product of a country to a style that refers to the popular animation style produced in Japan. It’s why we’re hearing phrases like “anime-styled” becoming more and more often.

A number of well-known / popular games playable in the English-speaking world these days, with anime-styled characters, aren’t from Japan, Genshin being one of the prime examples, from China, and there’s those like Blue Archive, from South Korea (though iirc they get a mix of South Koreans and Japanese illustrators for their assets). Japanese pop culture has had a strong influence on many Chinese and South Korean youths over long enough to result in the creation of companies specialized in making anime-styled games and even the “anime” we know of (some people have mentioned a few in other comments). A lot of the times though, these anime don’t really get as much attention from English audiences, unless you’re in a circle who’s attentive to that side of the market.

That said though, I’ve had people argue with me over the definitely of “anime” itself, saying that it should just be “animation”. To those, they aren’t wrong if they look simply at etymology and not what’s evocated in anime-watchers’ minds at the mention of anime. To be fair though, the line does start to get murky. I mean, take a look at this list I just looked up: https://whatnerd.com/best-non-japanese-anime-series/.

It’s IMO from here, but Japanese anime has a few distinctive features: generally heavier use of detailed backgrounds, and scenes that prioritizes raw art prowess over animation techniques. There’s also the fact that voice acting is just a huge scene in Japan, and so there’s a lot of good talent that comes up, whereas everywhere else, the scene is rather limited. Underlying the success of anime is manga and (light) novels, which is also a really active industry in Japan. Comics are just quite limited elsewhere.

I, for one, find it frustrating to use Windows when there are problems that you can’t just fix via their control panel, because you’d be left with nearly no tools aside from hoping someone knows the magic registers to tweak.

That said, a lot of how to “fix” a computer issue comes just from how well do you know your system, or just systems in general.

Let’s use your sound issue example. If it’s a sound issue, well, for starters, what program are we using to control sound? Pipewire? Pulseaudio? Or straight ALSA? Then let’s look at how to configure it. How do I know about them? I look up what sound servers are commonly used, and try to see if my system uses any of them? But how did I know about sound servers? Cause I tried installing Arch cause it’s a good way to learn about how Linux distros are put together, and I ended up learning about the pieces in the puzzle that makes up a daily-drivable desktop system.

So there’s a bit of curiosity and discovery process that helped me in setting up my knowledge to help situate and isolate problems in the system.

If it’s some other distro, where I don’t know how they’ve put the system together, I would definitely be a bit lost, but because of how transferrable a lot of skills and knowledge is in the Linux side of the world, I can probably find my way and figure out what needs to be done. Is it a lot of reading though? Absolutely!

It’s both a curse and a blessing that we have many options on building up a system in the Linux ecosystem, cause we have a lot more options, but it does mean we don’t have a central authoritative source or manual to things.

And this is sort of an aside, but use the Arch wiki even if you’re not using Archlinux. It’s one of the most fantastic resource for figuring out how to fix something in Linux, and to learn about various pieces that make up the whole puzzle. Give the Installation Guide a read even if you don’t care about installing Arch.