Yeah, I was talking about the magic of science or extreme coincidences.

Ultimately (having read your other reply), I don’t think biological definitions are useful when it comes to social things like gender. It’s just trying to change the argument into an easier one. “What is normal?” vs “what is possible?” or “what is ok?”.

The word “make” does a lot of heavy lifting when it comes to pregnancy. A word like “nurture” might fit better. Once the sperm and egg combine, it starts doing its own thing, the mother’s body just provides resources for it to continue growing and a safe place to do so for the first 9 months give or take.

So the way to make human egg cells would be to either be conceived as a female and have everything go well enough to grow those eggs, or probably some other methods involving introducing various chemicals to unspecialized cells to trick them into behaving as if that was happening.

Yeah, who the hell associates macs with higher competence? Before the 00s, I associated mac users with stumbling on the worse option but not realizing it, after the 00s, wanting to follow trends and/or overpay for hardware to seem rich. They’ve always been form over function, and simplicity over power, which are things that novice uses look for, not more experienced ones.

Or maybe more experienced ones when most of those experiences went badly and little was learned.

I don’t think that’s a special feature these days. My Linux desktop has a suspend shut down mode and though I usually close down whatever I’m playing, I believe there have been a few times where I’ve forgotten that I had a game still running minimized but it resumed fine and the game was still running fine.

The funny thing is, those power bricks you plug into the AC outlet convert that back to DC and various voltages (including 12v).

I’ve wondered for a while if we’ll start seeing more DC input electronics designed for setups like yours because there’s efficiency losses for both the DC -> AC step and the AC -> DC step.

Lol they haven’t moved on to C+++ yet and probably have no idea what a super pointer is.

That log had a child!

Github copilot can do some impressive things, but it also ignores my instructions to not try to run anything and leave testing to me that I’ve stopped bothering saying it and just block the attempt when it asks permission. Just yesterday, it confidently said it had figured out an issue I was debugging with it and made a bunch of code changes that literally only affected comments. If I leave it in agent mode (which allows it to edit code) when asking a question to clarify something and not intending any code changes but wanting to think about the answer (and telling it that), sometimes it still runs ahead and tries to make changes anyways.

When it does well, it’s uncanny how effective it can be these days, but it’s not reliable enough to be trusted to be in control of the whole system. Plus I don’t trust Microsoft enough to put my data on onedrive, and believe that access to data is the real reason behind their AI push, no matter how much usefulness and reliability improves.

I’d be curious to see the changes. Nigeria got worse, but did the rest of the countries? Even this one has a lot where the majority are still homophobic, despite the decline.

So going forward, social engineering will also be applicable to some computers themselves instead of just the users.

I had an A5 a while back and samsung didn’t make me hate them so the next phone I got was an s10. On that phone, they decided that they needed to dedicate a physical button to their fucking virtual assistant bixby. It was pretty obvious to me that these virtual assistants were mostly actually data vacuums, wanting to integrate into every aspect of your life so they can access better data on all those aspects.

Every single time it opened that fucking thing, it was unintentional. It wasn’t as annoying as your TV, since I bet the phone was way faster and had enough memory to not have to discard whatever else you were doing just to open its app, but it exemplifies how I see samsung today. Hardware had great specs but the software made it annoying by trying to lock everything in to their ecosystem without a hard lock like apple. Even MS had ways of disabling the windows button (which used to have a high chance of crashing a game if you accidentally hit it).

The “AI slop” people have quickly gotten as annoying as the “repost” people or “and then Albert Einstein clapped” people IMO.

Windows 10 had a better kernel than 7. Unfortunately, that kernel was packaged with the rest of windows 10.

One has a function that takes the next node as an argument, another just sets that up in a loop. Personally, I found the loop one a bit easier to visualize and debug via stepping through code, though admittedly the difference isn’t huge.

At one point I developed a habit of converting any recursive algorithm I was writing into a loop instead, since I knew function calls have overhead and all recursion really does is lets you use the calling stack and flow control as an invisible data structure.

Then I got a question about parsing brackets properly during an interview and wrote a loop-based parser to solve it and the guy had to fish for a bit before I remembered recursion and realized that’s the answer he was looking for. My mind just wouldn’t consider using a whole calling stack when an integer would do the trick faster.

Ok, first take a deep breath and calm down. Airspeed low is a good thing, you need to take this slowly! If the shaking of the steering wheel bugs you too much, they are adjustable, you just need to push it away from you.

Now one of the biggest dangers to planes flown randomly around the sky is other planes, so you need to get on the radio with air traffic control and request permission to crash and they can give you a clear vector from your current position to a suitable crash site.

If you’re lucky, there will be a nearby deserted island, in which case surviving the crash will make a much more interesting story than a plane crashing on a deserted island and everyone dying (or maybe the island will be purgatory or something and you really did die, or maybe purgatory will be a version where you didn’t crash… Be prepared to be very confused, especially since you won’t get to see any of the flashbacks that gives context to everyone who will lie about everything, even stupid shit like miraculously being able to walk again or other things that would be cool to talk about).

Oh, that is unless you’re one of the few adults on a plane full of kids, in which case, sorry, you’re fucked.

I don’t think the bubble bursting will slow AI that much, it’ll just be a round of hot potatoe over, the losers will lose their money and others will come in hoping to be profitable since they can skip a bunch of R&D costs.

AI is overhyped, but just like the internet after the dotcom bubble burst, it’s not going anywhere.

Plus I suspect that this time will be a dollar collapse rather than stock market collapse, which would mean prices would go up even more.

That assumes SetTimeout() is O(1), but I suspect it is O(log(n)), making the algorithm O(n*log(n)), just like any other sort.

Did some looking into the specifics of SetTimeout() and while it uses a data structure with theoretical O(1) insertion, deletion, and execution (called a time wheel if you want to look it up), the actual complexity for deletion and execution is O(n/m) (if values get well distributed across the buckets, just O(n) if not) where m is the number of buckets used. For a lot of use cases you do get an effective O(1) for each step, but I don’t believe using it as a sorting engine would get the best case performance out of it. So in terms of just n (considering m is usually constant), it’ll be more like O(n²).

And it’s actually a bit worse than that because the algorithm isn’t just O(n/m) on execution. It needs to check each element of one bucket every tick of whatever bucket resolution it is using. So it’s actually non-trivially dependent on the wait time of the longest value. It’s still a constant multiplier so the big O notation still says O(n) (just for the check on all ticks), but it might be one of the most misleading O(n)'s I’ve ever seen.

Other timer implementations can do better for execute and delete, but then you lose that O(1) insertion and end up back at O(n*log(n)), but one that scales worse than tree sort because it is literally tree sort plus waiting for timeouts.

Oh and now, reading your comment again after reading about SetTimeout(), I see I misunderstood when I first read it and thought you meant it was almost as fast as bucket sort, but see now you meant it basically is bucket sort because of that SetTimeout() implementation. Bucket sort best case is O(n), worst case is O(n²), so I guess I can still do decent analysis lol.

Yeah, I can say that covers most of the “troubleshooting” I’ve had to do with games that don’t work. I usually go in thinking “uh oh, maybe it’s time for me to have to check a bunch of proton versions, this will be a pain” only to see that it’s trying to run it natively and switching to proton at all resolves any issues.

The only other thing that comes to mind is that I use dvorak and something about the way keyboard layouts are handled means it tries to “preserve” the bindings when I switch layouts in game, so it keeps the messed up QWERTY keys but dvorak layout even when I switch (and can tell it’s switched from typing things like in chat). Most games let me rebind the keys so I just need to go through the bindings, hitting the key currently bound each time as if I was using QWERTY and it rebinds. Though I suspect that due to the “preserve the layout” behaviour that keyboard input is handled specially by proton and maybe I can tweak settings to get the desired behaviour (ie, changing layouts in game means I want the bindings to change).

It is a translation layer, but the bit you added “to native code” sounds like you’re misunderstanding what translation layer means.

Games use a collection of APIs (DirectX is a set of APIs, but there’s others to handle offer operations like network access and such) to interact with OS functionality, and also receive communicarion back from the OS (the windows message loop). Proton and wine are implementations of those APIs that translate the API calls to their equivalent in linux, as well as setting up their own message loop that translates messages from the linux kernel and UI system into their windows equivalent before sending them to the registered windows messaging loop functions.

A simple example would be if a function header in windows looks like int32 SomeFuncWin( int64 index, char* name ), but looks like int32 SomeFuncLinux( std::string name, int64 index ), then the translation would be something like:

int32 SomeFuncWin( int64 index, char* name ) {
std:string TranslatedName( name );
return SomeFuncLinux( TranslatedName, index );
}

So it doesn’t change/translate any of the code of the program itself, it just provides the environment that behaves exactly like a windows environment by translating the “hey could the OS do this for me?” requests from windows to linux. Note that not all translations are that simple, there might need to be more processing on the values, missing arguments might need to be filled in, irrelevant arguments ignored, sometimes data needs to be translated to another format, etc.

The speed ups can come from improved efficiency in the underlying implementations (which Vulkan has, as I understand even using a translation layer from DX to Vulkan in windows can result in better performance) or having fewer services running in the background.