Quibblekrust

@Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I am sorry. I take it back. You are correct. Words only have one meaning, and that meaning can never be stretched to mean new things.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Proof that math is real⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I didn’t say rectangles are squares, I said rectangles are square.

  Square can be an adjective. When you say a rectangle is square, you’re saying all four corners are square. If you make a picture frame in the shape of a oblique parallelogram, it’s not square. If you make it in the shape of a rectangle, it’s square. If you make it in the shape of a square, it is both square and a square.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  You knew what he meant. Don’t be pedantic. Having “a back and forth conversation with an AI, where I also made manual edits at times, to iteratively produce on an image” is too verbose, and “collaborate” sums it up nicely.

  Especially since the conversation with the AI is literally in plain English. Do you talk to your power drill in English? Or table saw? Or toaster? No, but you do talk to an AI and have a conversation.

  Just because it’s not “intelligent” or “self aware”—or other things you definitely don’t want it to be anyways—doesn’t mean you aren’t having a conversation or collaborating. Those words apply just fine.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Proof that math is real⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Square means “90 degrees”, so rectangles are square. They’re just not “a” square.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I hope this clears things up⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t like the seam down the middle.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Rebuilding⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  reconned

  Do you mean retconned as in retroactive continuity? Or is Spinosaurus a serial victim of the same con?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for sharing your thoughts. No real arguments from me. It was a mistake on my part to equate what I had in my mind with the meme above. It is really is two different things.

  I just spontaneously remembered the FTL drive from the novel “Variable Star” by Spider Robinson and Robert Heinlein. The operator of the drive must hold multiple mutually contradictory thoughts in their mind at once, for hours at a time, in shifts with the other operators. Usually two at a time for redundancy. A failure to have at least one operator holding the required mental state would stall the drive and restarting it was very difficult.

  It was never really explained how it works, but it’s taken totally seriously. It’s not like flying in “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” where you fall and forget to hit the ground. I thought it was a clever idea. To make consciousness an explicit part of FTL travel by basically holding your mind in a superposition of thought.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Wild Ones⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  What is that even supposed to mean? Did they make a typo?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Not exactly. At least I don’t think. Einstein didn’t believe in quantum mechanics at all, or that it was inherently random until measured. Bohr said it was, but I don’t think he necessarily equated conscious observation with measurement. Einstein believed there must be hidden variables, but if there are, they’re non-local.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  it’s a moot point because it’s the sensor is the “observer”, and it’s not “being observed” that affects the outcome.

  Thing is, that’s an assumption. You dont know that for sure. Just like you can’t prove the speed of light isn’t different in different directions. I’m not saying you shouldn’t be free to believe that, but you must admit it’s an assumption.

  I’m not a really mystical person, but I don’t discount the possibility. That would be arrogant. Simply being conscious is rather bizarre. How does the universe even support that? What is it? Is there a consciousness field? Why does a blob of fat, protein, and sodium ions give rise to consciousness? Surely, life could have evolved and thrived without experiencing life. I can easily imagine mindless, robotic life just doing it’s thing.

  Since no one can currently explain any of that, and no one can know for sure a wavefunction has collapsed until you’ve lookef at the results, I also don’t discount that consciousness might play a role. I remain agnostic about it.

  imply that there’s something special, different about consciousness.

  If you don’t think there’s something special and unusual about consciousness, I don’t know what to say. 😄 I don’t believe in a soul, but at least I admit that consciousness is special, and that the universe is weird because of that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, if you look at the plate, then you’ve collapsed the wave function, and the data on the hard drive is then determine, and can’t contradict the result on the plate.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Damn, that’s quite the write-up! I actually haven’t watched any of her videos in over a year, but I used to watch them a lot, so I figured I’d give her credit for part of my education. Her takes did seem a little odd at times, but it was refreshing to watch a science curmudgeon sometimes. I simply got sick of her schtick after a while, and did read a little controversy about her. I had no idea about the trans stuff.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I mentioned my sources of science news because you accused me of being misled by… somebody. So fuck you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You need to work on your grammar, spelling,.and punctuation. I can’t understand a thing you’re saying.

  I’m KFC Double Downing on the double slits being doubly doubtful until you’ve observed the result.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  We were talking about colloquial use of a word like “literally”, and not entire bodies of science being replaced with religious terms. Those two things are not even remotely similar.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You have a stick up your butt.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, no. Not if you put a detector in one of the slits. It collapses the wave function, and the interference pattern disappears.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, communication works best when people agree on what words mean, and a great, great many people have agreed that “literally” means things other than “literally”.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t understand. How can they “get” a wave pattern if they didn’t look at the data?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Haha, no I haven’t. I don’t believe in magic. I watch mainstream YouTube science channels, and not any “mystical” ones. PBS Spacetime, Dr Ben Miles, Quanta Magazine, Sabine Hossenfelder, etc.

  So, I ask you: please design an experiment that proves the outcome is determined precisely when the detector detects the particle going through the slit, and not when a person observes the recording the detector made. You can’t. You can’t prove that the detector detected something until you look at the result, and until you do, for all you know, it’s in a superposition. That’s all I’m saying.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Words mean what people think they mean when they say them. Nothing else. Miscommunication can occur if the speaker and listener don’t have the same concept in their head, but it doesnt change the fact that words are just people serializing their thoughts with sounds or text. Dictionaries are not prescriptive, they are documentative.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Literally exactly how it works, too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Nah, man, it’s literally how it works (for all we know). The wave function doesn’t collapse until the data is read. You can’t prove otherwise, so people are free to believe it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What is grass?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s something dinosaurs smoked to get high.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Electricity explained⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Image

  Spoiler

  I have no idea how much of this information is slop. I think it’s funny that ChatGPT made a decent attempt at this. You can downvote if you want, meatbags, but I think it’s funny.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It's called fashion, sweaty, look it up⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  That is what sweaty means, yes.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It's called fashion, sweaty, look it up⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Sweaty

  🥵

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  The fact that that “right” angle isn’t square makes me so angry.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Tough luck⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Chads have deoxyribododecahedron genes.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Birthing pains⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I dunno, ducks have maze-like vaginas to avoid pregnancy from rape. Evolution optimizes for the survival of the species, not for reproducing some maximum possible amount. Perhaps they evolved when limiting reproduction wad a benefit to the species.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Real⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Soon, though, using gravitational lensing of the sun. Sometime around 2035 maybe.