#2

450 posts· Last used 9h

Replying to @BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
#1. They open their mouth to pass water over their gills from anterior to posterior. #2 wouldn’t get them any nicotine since it would be flowing away.
0
0
0
0
Replying to on slrpnk.net
Funny you can buy a whole bunch of styrofoam from amazon, gasoline from your local gas station is ingredient #2 for making sure that warehouse stays burning for a while
0
0
0
0
Replying to @frongt@lemmy.zip
You did not read the post. This is not a post about empirical results. If you bothered to read what I wrote at all, I have said many times that nothing I have written here has any relevance to anything experimental, because the interpretation of SR discussed by Bell is mathematically equivalent to SR, and is only a philosophical reinterpretation of the same body of mathematics. The argument is, as shown by mathematical proofs I have referenced if you bothered to read the post, that QM is not logically consistent with SR (under the standard interpretation). The only four ways out presented in the academic literature are (as argued by Frauchiger and Renner): Inconsistency doesn’t matter There is a multiverse Quantum mechanics is wrong The reinterpretation of SR discussed by Bell is the right way to think about the mathematics of SR I am merely saying that (a) Consistency should matter, or else you cannot even meaningfully have a theory of objective physical reality. (b) As pointed out by Bub’s mathematical proof, Frauchiger and Renner are not correct in saying that #2 resolves the inconsistency, and there are other problems with #2 as well (see Bell’s paper “Quanutm Mechanics for Cosmologists” and Maudlin’s paper "Can the World be Only Wavefunction?). © I don’t think quantum mechnaics is wrong. Ergo, I am forced into #4. If you want to convince me I’m wrong of #4, you need to give me an argument defending #1-#3. The mathematical proofs force you into #1-#3. It’s funny that one of the most upvoted personal attacks against me for “disagreeing with the field” even though if I accept #3 I’d have to believe QM is wrong, which to me seems like a much bigger disagreement with the field!
0
0
0
0
Confession: I don't understand how visibility works when replying via Bluesky bridging. I was replying to someone who was defending Brian Heywood's I-638 by saying that the initiative didn't even use the word "genital." (Link: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:xaxnvhjkkryuiesxm4rhxkrf/post/3mvolfuc74s2b) I replied, but then my reply fell down some private mention wormhole. I intended unrestricted visibility on my reply, so here is try #2.
0
1
0
0
Good morning all! Waddle we do today? Talk about ducks! Did you know: The oldest recorded Black-bellied Whistling Duck was a male, and at least 10 years, 7 months when it was found in 2015 in Louisiana 🦆 These ducks are often nocturnal or active in the late evening, foraging for grains, seeds, and aquatic plants in fields or shallow water :DUCKC_PNG: Their signature call is a high-pitched, wheezy whistle that can sound surprisingly like a squeaky dog toy :duckdancing: 🦴 Keep calm and quack on everyone! :rubberduck: BirdBrainer Daily Challenge — Sep 15, 2026 ✅ Got it! 🔥 9 day streak Play at https://birdbrainer.app #birdbrainerapp #birdbrainer #birds Bird of the Day Black-bellied Whistling Duck Dendrocygna autumnalis Photo credit: #1 John Schwarz #2 Alexandria Zoo
26
0
13
0
Yhdysvaltain presidentti Donald #Trump Truth Socialin kautta: Onko tekoälyn osalta kukaan nähnyt yrityshistoriassa alan johtajien vaativan sääntelyä, joka voimakkaasti toteutettuna ajaa heidät unohdukseen ja konkurssiin? Se, että tekoäly valtaa maailman, tuhoaa ihmiskunnan ja kaiken muun pahan, on HUIJAUS, joka ei eroa VENÄJÄ, VENÄJÄ, VENÄJÄ — UKRAINA, UKRAINA, UKRAINA — VIRASTEETARKASTUSHUIJAUS #1 — VIRASTEETARKASTUSHUIJAUS #2 — ja kaikista muista HUIJAUKSISTA ja PETOKSISTEISTA
0
0
0
0
Replying to @Jiral@lemmy.world
There are several different problems here and banning Chinese cars is possibly the worst solution. And with Trump and magats in charge, a better solution is off the table anyway. Problem 1: American automakers don’t make anything good and it’s all expensive. Problem 2: Americans need jobs, everyone buying their (second) most expensive belonging from abroad transfers manufacturing jobs abroad. Problem 3: EV transition in the US isn’t going as strong as it should be. Problem 4: China has EV subsidies for cars sold to other countries. This allows for dumping stock at below cost prices, after already having super low production costs (among other things China is the world’s battery manufacturer, Chinese EVs get batteries for much cheaper; also Chinese labor costs are at most a quarter of union labor in the US). Usually EV subsidies, if they exist, are on purchasing, not production. The solution, to me, isn’t banning Chinese EVs. It’s a further increase of tariffs on cars made in China and then that tariff money should be used to fund an EV purchase subsidy so that all EVs get cheaper for the end user to buy (yes, said subsidies would also apply to Chinese EVs). Now if BYD or whoever wants to sell a ton of cars in the US, they have to manufacture in the US, which means they have similar costs to other manufacturers (minus the batteries of course, nothing to do about that without causing a ton of issues. You can’t just increase tariffs on Chinese batteries because non-Chinese manufacturers need them too). My proposed solution would directly affect #2 and #4 in a positive manner, be better for #3 than outright banning Chinese EVs, but not as good as simply allowing them to dump nearly-free cars on Americans (which would of course increase in price once the competition is dead) and forces the American automakers themselves to sort out #1 because right now much of their competition is the German big 3 and Toyota, all of which are expensive too (shit, I consider Toyota more expensive than the Germans because I look at used cars, I love depreciation) But what do I know, I’m not American and don’t know shit about economics and trade wars and don’t even own an EV.
0
1
0
0
Replying to @u0421793@toot.pikopublish.ing
@u0421793@toot.pikopublish.ing Apparently good blocking can save an absolute fortune on a shoot because you get away with a single setup for the scene. Doesn’t really apply to comic art in quite the same way, but Alan Moore’s a master of it. Check out page 8 of Big Numbers #2, for an example. Every Frame a Painting on the Spielberg Oner is rather good on cinematic blocking. https://youtu.be/8q4X2vDRfRk
1
1
1
0
Replying to @mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
Do you completely fail at critical thinking? I’ll slow it down so you can understand: Linus sees sloppy code written by a human Linus sees sloppy code written by an AI Why did #1 not corrupt him have decades, but #2 definitely will? There is no reason, sloppy code is sloppy code whether written by a human or written by an AI. You’re equating shitty developers becoming vibe coders with a skilled software engineer using a tool. I think you just don’t know the difference between a junior developer and a senior software engineer. Maybe you just don’t have any experience in software development and are just reading articles on random websites.
0
1
0
0
Good morning! I hope everyone is having a caw-some day so far! Guess what?: There are approximately 135 corvid species and almost all have the propensity to remember individual human faces and can hold grudges against them if needed 🐦‍⬛ Like other ravens, the Australian Raven is known for its intelligence and problem-solving skills 🐦‍⬛ Australian Ravens can pack extra shredded meat inside their mouths, right under their tongue, to carry it elsewhere 🧳 🐦‍⬛ Today has the Poe-tential for greatness ~ take full advantage! BirdBrainer Daily Challenge — Sep 9, 2026 ✅ Got it! 🔥 3 day streak Play at https://birdbrainer.app #birdbrainerapp #birdbrainer #birds Bird of the Day Australian Raven Corvus coronoides Photo credit: Tim Van Leeuwen #1 Caroline Jones #2
33
0
11
0