I don’t get the joke with the beaver.

It’s obviously been painted over and the word “Copper” in the text is replacing some other word that was there before. But I have no idea what it was before.

A quick glance at the summary table can answer that. Planck units seem to do the trick.

Come on, you are able to analize words!

No, you can’t. Believe me, I’ve tried. I did everything I could to analyze this topic. There are many things that are possible to analize. Many household items. But not words.

There are various systems of units where select physical constants are set to 1. A handy comparison chart is on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units?wprov=sfla1

It turns out you can’t harmonize all the physical constants. Some will necessarily end up as some non-round number.

Most of them have speed of light = 1, but some have it as 1/α where α is the fine-structure constant (α = e² / 4πε₀ħc ≈ 0.007297)

I think (not 100% sure) that UEFI is a replacement for BIOS. All modern computers use UEFI.

People still colloquially call it “BIOS” because it serves a similar purpose, but there is a technical difference.

They’ve come a long way. https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-11-25

(click above link for full comic)

Get out.

You’re welcome! Folding@home is the big one, and the Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search is also pretty popular (though IMHO a waste of resources for a relatively useless result). But I just looked into this topic myself after posting that comment, and turns out there’s a huge list of such “volunteer computing” projects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_volunteer_computing_projects

So while Folding@home is a great one and medical scientific research, you might pick something else from that list. Perhaps more than one!

Now the confession: I’m a hypocrite. I never ran any of these volunteer computing projects on my own PCs. But that’s partly because I tend to shut them off every night, so a lot of the usable time for it isn’t really usable. The other part is basically that I never bothered to do it.

But I think after this conversation reminded me of it, I might look into installing it on my PC!

At that point you might as well run Folding@home on your PC just to act as a heater. It’s literally a win-win for you and for society.

(They’re not. Oil in the ground is mostly trees.)

Where’s the original post?

That’s interesting. I’ll have to read up on that. You’re right, I am thinking about boolean algebra.

In the mean time though, I’ll note that Boolean algebra on Wikipedia also refers to this operation, so I’m not alone:

Material conditional

The first operation, x → y, or Cxy, is called material implication. If x is true, then the result of expression x → y is taken to be that of y (e.g. if x is true and y is false, then x → y is also false). But if x is false, then the value of y can be ignored; however, the operation must return some Boolean value and there are only two choices. So by definition, x → y is true when x is false (relevance logic rejects this definition, by viewing an implication with a false premise as something other than either true or false).

It also uses the second interpretation that I mentioned in my earlier comment (4 above this one), with true being default, rather than the one we’ve been discussing.

The comment you replied to is my response to this. It’s the only boolean operation that works this way. All the others are straightforward.

Yeah, that kinda works but I don’t like it. See my reply to the other comment.

Yup, that’s my interpretation too. It just doesn’t sit well with all the other operators.

All the others are phrased as direct questions about the values of A and B:

• A AND B = “Are A and B both true?”
• A OR B = “Are either A or B true, or both?”
• A NAND B = “Is (A AND B) not true?”
• A IMPLIES B = “Is it possible, hypothetically speaking, for it to be the case that A implies B, given the current actual values of A and B?”

You see the issue?

Edit: looking online, some people see it as: “If A is true, take the value of B.” A implies that you should take the value of B. But if A is false, you shouldn’t take the value of B, instead you should use the default value which is inexplicably defined to be true for this operation.

This is slightly more satisfying but I still don’t like it. The implication (ha) that true is the default value for a boolean doesn’t sit right with me. I don’t even feel comfortable with a boolean having a default value, let alone it being true instead of false which would be more natural.

Edit 2: fixed a brain fart for A NAND B

bottom projectile traveling at mach 5

I never got why “implies” is called that. How does the phrase “A implies B” relate to the output’s truth table?

I have my own “head canon” to remember it but I’ll share it later, want to hear someone else’s first.

Even your title isn’t the true beginning. Before the terminal, there was just a printer. Teletype, was it?

I desperately want to know if this is:

1. A toy factory actually finding a creative use for excess stock of the doll head
2. A creative parent fixing their child’s toy
3. Just a joke for a meme