linja

joined 6 months ago
[–] linja@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

I think this is more accurately vice signalling.

[–] linja@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It might seem harmless, but the purpose of a joke is to draw a distinction between those who get it and those who don't, fostering a sense of community. In this "joke", the in-group is people who don't know something; the community ideal fostered there is that knowledge is undesirable, that anything that seems unintuitive to the uninformed mind is inherently ridiculous. The "joke" has no effect if it doesn't do this. Entertaining the idea without challenge is dangerous.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I only read one book, and it's a Good Book, don't you know!

[–] linja@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ok, I think I see the problem. To me, MSb (Most Significant bit) isn't an ordering at all, just a label that one particular bit has. To specify an ordering, you'd also need to say whether that bit comes first or last. This concept doesn't exist in computer memory because, as previously mentioned, bits in a byte aren't ordered in memory. I was thinking of the individual digits in a field (each Y in YYYY) as separate bytes in a word, so endianness order makes sense to think about; separate fields in this analogy were contiguous like struct fields. I think my mental model is sensible, since ISO 8601 is fundamentally a sequence of characters, which are all in an absolute order.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Hah. Church tried to ban it because it was "associated with illegal money trading", I remember that. What is it about maths that makes non-mathematicians think themselves qualified to judge matters they don't understand?

[–] linja@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Right, and in data transfer every byte can be placed in an absolute order relative to every other. And the digits within the respective fields are already big-endian (most significant digit first), so making the fields within the whole date little-endian is mixed-endian.

I have iterated this several times, so I worry there's a fundamental miscommunication happening here.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I might not find a joke funny, or I might not have the necessary context to appreciate it; that's "not getting" a joke. If it's possible to have too much context to appreciate a "joke", it's at the expense of people who know more than the audience.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think I almost understand what you're getting at. If I do, it's uncodifiable. You can't draft an organisational system with a clause that no one is allowed to use logical fallacies to defend it.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Right, and the most significant bit of the whole date is the first Y in YYYY, which we can't put at the end unless we reverse the year itself. So we can either have pure big-endian, or PDP-endian. I know which one I'm picking.

Your literal statement is also just wrong. The solitary implication of endianness is byte ordering, because individual bits in a byte have no ordering in memory. Every single one has the exact same address; they have significance order, but that's entirely orthogonal to memory. Hex readouts order nybbles on the same axis as memory so as not to require 256 visually distinct digits and because they only have two axes; that's a visual artefact, and reflects nothing about the state of memory itself. ISO 8601 on the other hand is a visual representation, so digit and field ordering are in fact the same axis.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Whoa there. I detest this post as much as you do, but there's no need to start throwing out baseless accusations. @Summzashi@lemmy.one isn't funny at all.

[–] linja@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ok, so this is a "joke" which is only funny to people who do not understand the context, and moreover jump to insane, unsubstantiated conclusions rather than expending an infinitesimal measure of effort to understand something they haven't seen before. It's active mockery of the very concept of being open to new ideas.

[–] linja@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

The irony is a real foreigner could probably do maths better than them.

view more: next ›