Lanthanae

joined 2 years ago
[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 6 months ago (10 children)

Many people (including me) consider the best game of 2024 to be Balatro.

Balatro. A game made by one guy who legitimately didn't even think anyone other than his friends and family would buy it.

AAA studios do not understand what people enjoy at all.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

They didn't convert anything to anything, and the 1.010010001... number isn't binary

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago

We need to start teaching formal logic in grade schools I'm going insane.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 months ago

That's so elegant. I love it.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 6 months ago

Trying to understand theology is a waste of time because it's all made up.

Made up, sure, but still very useful to understand because so many people believe it.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I've run a full DJ setup with speakers, a mixer, soundboard, laptop, etc. off a single line of 6-8 daisy-chained extension cords more times than I can count.

...uh...how have I never learned of this.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

In terms of formal logic, this...

Since Pi is infinite and non-repeating, would that mean any finite sequence of non-repeating digits from 0-9 should appear somewhere in Pi in base 10?

...and this...

Does any possible string of infinite non-repeating digits contain every possible finite sequence of non repeating digits?

are equivalent statements.

The phrase "since X, would that mean Y" is the same as asking "is X a sufficient condition for Y". Providing ANY example of X WITHOUT Y is a counter-example which proves X is NOT a sufficient condition.

The 1.010010001... example is literally one that is taught in classes to disprove OPs exact hypothesis. This isn't a discussion where we're both offering different perspectives and working towards a truth we don't both see, thus is a discussion where you're factually wrong and I'm trying to help you learn why lol.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 months ago (20 children)

Its not stupid. To disprove a claim that states "All X have Y" then you only need ONE example. So, as pick a really obvious example.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 6 months ago

This is why I knew I found the right therapist when she asked what I've been stressed about and I said "the current state of politics" and she just said "oh yeah, fair" and we started working on how to manage it while understanding that the root cause is still truly as bad as it is.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

such as the key jailbreaking method right now being an appeal to empathy

Honestly the most optimistic thing that's come out of this. A potential AGI singularity is still terrifying to me...but this does take the edge off a bit.

[–] Lanthanae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 years ago (5 children)

18/20 because after that you ought to be able to be a candy-giver. This whole thing only works if we have enough candy-givers, and too late of a cutoff age skews the balance.

view more: ‹ prev next ›