🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@realcaseyrollins

It is certainly possible. It is really the only reason im glad we have some extremists on the right in SCOTUS like clarence... he may be a complete dipshit, but he may at least help invalidate any anti-2A attempts for the next few years till people come to their senses.

@icedquinn

@LouisIngenthron Oh I agree entierly.. its a weak excuse. Just the only one I can fathom one would argue at all.

I m,ean its clearly syntatical and not functional in nature cause we are basically just treating [] like a function. We are entierly int he land of syntatic sugar, so any explanation is going to be one that is purely hand waving.

@icedquinn No one is asking for background checks for guns, we already have that so its not a ask... what they want is a violation of medical history to occur in **addition** to ones criminal background check.. they just wont say what they actually want because they know how weak an ask like that sounds when it comes to privacy rights.

@LouisIngenthron I guess the only reason that makes sense is that the format for doing it... like "this" makes no sense in the static context.... but why the word "this" is needed at all seems syntatic itself so seems the only reasoning is "this unusual syntax we choose is confusing in that scenario and we dont want to change the pattern"

@LouisIngenthron

Ahh so its a syntax limitation. You would effectively like a shorter syntax that would otherwise be functionally the same as a longer one.

Interesting. Yea I cant think of a good reason a language would prevent that.

@LouisIngenthron

What exactly are you looking for when you say "static indexing", do you mean syntatically Foo["Bar"] but dont care if in terms of implementation it is effectively the same thing... or do you mean an immutable index defined at compile time? If so how is that useful in any way as opposed to just an immutable index that is created at run time? I assume your trying to address a performance concern with generating the index whent he program first spins up?

I love how democrats are pretending people arent voting for Biden due to his age... no no no, its due to his **senility** not his age. Its that his mental decline is obvious and concerning, not his age at all...

inb4 Trump isnt senile, but he is a moron. Plenty of reasons not to support Trump either, none of which are senility however.

@bibliolater subtle changes can make big differences to aesthetics.

@VisualStuart

Age doesnt matter to me when voting. However stupidity does, and thus rules out Trump, and senility also matters to me, and thus rules out Biden. The only thing left is to figure out who of the people left I can vote for....

@KimPerales If we are talking Trump and generally his supporters, then yea, I agree with this stance.

@bibliolater Not a huge change, but I do agree the new font is slightly nicer.

@futurebird

I am glad you foun a product you like.

I am even more glad its not out of shame of your scars I am glad it isnt out of insecurity but just cause you like the stockings :)

@jrdepriest I too have a copy of this tarot deck somewhere. Sadly I am unwilling to sell it.

@bibliolater no rush

@bibliolater send a screen shot. I can potentially offer that as a theme if it makes a good difference.

@BlackAzizAnansi

Yes I have... Masks for me are just not an option most of the time. As a COVID scientist I did need to wear one in the lab (and i was of course not objecting), but it severely limited my lab time due to discomfort. Naturally as a result I never wore one outside the lab.

As a result if there was a particularly high risk area (like a nursing home) I'd just avoid the space rather than wear a mask.

Yes people have been violently aggressive about my no-mask stance even when I specifically made it a point to avoid high risk settings and generally avoided places a mask was required like any store that had a sign.

@arri

> It's actually very bad, worse than humans by far at what it does. But because people collectively believe it is good at stuff, people are focusing so much on "the singularity" or "it replacing [x job]" the real risk continues unhindered.

As an expert in this field I can say that is an inaccurate classification. As with most things it lacks the nuance that is vital. AI can and is smarter, better, and faster than humans **at certain tasks**, at other tasks it is much worse. Which tasks those are change year by year as well.

> This is a good example of the true goal of ML: introduce bias and inefficiency in areas where inefficiency is desirable to capitalism.

This and many concerns are valid. There are tons of ethical concerns in the here and now and those concerns dont look much like the skynet fears you hear people talking about. Accidentally picking up human biases, prejudice, or ineffiency is a very legitimate problem. That said the problem is oddly enough the most human problem in AI. AI essentially has the same problem as humans in that they need to be "raised" (taught) by humans and in that process faults from the teacher are often passed to the student.

@admitsWrongIfProven An update. They responded to my email and were willing to add my name to the image.