Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C
Posts
2
Comments
462
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Very few things are truly chaotic. E.g. the weather. It has chaotic elements, that make long range, hyper accurate predictions hard. We can still make larger scale predictions, like India's monsoons.

    The same applies to ecosystems. We can make broad observations and predictions, without knowing the finer details. E.g. You will have a hierarchy of predators/prey. A lot of organisms on the bottom, with less as you move up. The other classic is colonisation of volcanic islands. Mosses etc come first, with progressively larger and more complex plants following, as soil develops. Animals follow the tiers of plants.

  • Spiders don't have to eat their mate. The female just tends to be hungry, after mating. The male is snack sized, right there, and of no further use.

    Apparently, when trying to breen endangered spiders, they make sure the female is well fed prior. It gives the male a chance to make a quiet getaway.

  • The primary magnets will be super conducting magnets. Unless you have liquid helium (or liquid nitrogen, if your lucky) to cool it, it will just be an interesting rock.

  • Oops!

    Jump
  • I generally view them as developmental or unreliable methods. A 20% risk of killing everyone involved is horrifying for a normal away mission return. However, the same risk for pulling a team away from imminent death is a lot more tolerable.

    This also explains how they can implement them so quickly, it's already buried in the codebase.

  • Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

    • Will Rogers
  • It did though. Hitler could have gone after Britain and france earlier. However, he thought Britain was staying out of things, and so played more safe and slow. This brought Britain the time it needed. Hitler honestly didn't expect Britain to declare war on him, and that slowed his assault on that front. If WW2 had gone serious even 6 months earlier, Britain would have been in serious trouble. The RAF would have collapsed under the luftwaffa, and WW2 would have been very different. Appeasement traded lives for time.

    Don't get me wrong, it was a dick move, and threw others under the tanks tracks to save Britain. It's also worth noting that this is not what Trump is trying to do. He's just being a boot licker to the most powerful person who will talk to him. Appeasement at least had a positive goal.

  • Appeasement can work, just not in the obvious way. It's like throwing steaks at a pack of hungry wolves. It won't slow them for long, but it might give you enough time to find the shells, and load the shotgun.

    What Trump is doing doesn't even rise to the level of appeasement. He's just begging like a whipped dog to his master.

  • To his credit, Chamberlain wasn't as bad as he's made out. When he implemented his policy of appeasement, Britain was not actually capable of meaningfully resisting nazi Germany. He basically brought time to bring Britain back to a war footing. When it became obvious to the public that war was coming, he fell on his sword. This cleared the way for Churchill to take charge, without significant infighting. He also inherited Britain on a far better war footing, and even then it was a close thing.

    Basically, Chamberlain knew his plan wouldn't work long term. He took one "for king and country", likely knowing how it would be perceived. I can at least respect him for that.

  • We have "family film nights". We all have dinner together, then get out some beanbags, on the floor. We then all watch a film together, cuddled up on the beanbags.

    The films are ones our daughter hasn't seen, and can often push her boundaries. E.g. we watched "Monsters Inc" together. She was a little bit scared, but with mummy and daddy there, she loved it.

    It's definitely one for building memories together. We are too often distracted, even when present. Having dedicated family time makes a huge difference.

    Oh, and she also doesn't watch much paw patrol, even when around friends. Apparently "Daddy doesn't like it" is quite enough to put her off it. A classic "respect over fear" situational win for me.

    On a side note. The screen time correlation goes away, when you correct for the child's parenting and lifestyle situation. It's not "screens are bad" but that kids in worse situations watch more TV, etc. The causation is backwards.

  • Of course not, that would be immoral. They'll track trollies and baskets, then tag it to the till and your loyalty card. It would be a lot more consistent, and harder to dodge.

  • I can see multiple uses for the tech. Unfortunately, many are a but dystopian, but some are legitimately useful.

  • We know how it works, we just don't yet understand what is going on under the hood.

    In short, quantum effects can be very obvious with small systems. The effects generally get averaged out over larger systems. A measurement inherently entangled your small system with a much larger system diluting the effect.

    The blind spot is that we don't know what a quantum state IS. We know the maths behind it, but not the underlying physics model. It's likely to fall out when we unify quantum mechanics with general relativity, but we've been chipping at that for over 70 years now, with limited success.

  • For those confused, it's worth noting the difference between observed as a layman concept and as a quantum mechanical one.

    In QM, to observed is to couple the observer to the "system" being observed. Think of it like "observing" your neighbour, over a fence using a BB gun. When you hit flesh, you know where your neighbour is. Unfortunately, the system has now been fundamentally changed. In a classical system, you could turn down the power, until your neighbour doesn't notice the hits. Unfortunately, QM imposes fundamental limits on your measurements (heisenburg and his uncertainty principal). In order to observe your neighbour accurately, you need to hit them hard enough that the will also feel it and react differently.

    QM behaves in a similar way. Initially, the system is just a single particle, and is not very restrained. This allows it to behave in a very wave like manner. When you observe it, the system now includes the whole observation system, as this coupling propagates, more and more atoms etc get linked. The various restraints cause an effect called decoherence. The system behaves ever more like a classical physical system.

    In short, a quantum mechanical "observer" is less sneaky watching, and more hosing down with a machine gun and watching the ricochets.

  • I just spent the weekend driving a remote controlled Henry hoover around a festival. It's amazing how many people immediately anthropomorphised it.

    It got a lot of head pats, and cooing, as if it was a small, happy, excitable dog.

  • The latter is called deathworlders. It was written as a short story. The author disappeared for a while. When he came back, he started writing a whole web serial on the premise.

    I also remember reading the former, though where is another question.

  • I was curious and looked it up. Apparently it mostly happens between trees of the same species, with several causes.

    Most are mechanical. The tips brush against each other, and damage new branches and leaves. Both trees divert growth away from the area.

    Some also sense shading via red light. They focus growth away from shade. This means neither tree grows into the gap, since they are partially shading each other.

    It also helps limit the spread of leaf eating parasites. Again, particularly useful in a forest of the same species.

    So yes, the trees are social distancing, to avoid the spread of disease.

  • Mental health treatment, for both cops and soldiers, should be mandatory. If we are going to give them the power of life and death over another human being, they should have as much support as possible.

    Personally, I think all police should be required to attend a mental health session at least once a month (even more, if they choose to). What happens in that session is entirely down to them. Hell, set up some games consoles, a TV and a small library. If they want to turn up and just read a book for an hour, that's fine! However, they should be required to be in the room, with a trained professional.

    This would go a long way towards helping them. They can vent off, get some constructive tips, chill out, or fully engage. All would help. It also helps nip things like PTSD in the bud. Shooting a teen, because they drew a gun on you, and watching them die, is still watching a teen die by your hand.

    In a perfect world, it would be a good exit path for retiring officers. Train them up, and they also know what it's like to be in their shoes.

  • There's actually a genetic bias on it. It can be overridden, but you'll always feel a bit burnt out from it. It also changes with age (teenagers are the latest, getting earlier as you age.