TootSweet

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Short version: cable is more optimized for sending everyone the same content at the same time. (And all users connected to cable get all channels all the time, even if they're only watching one or two at the time.) Internet is made for each user getting what they ask for when they ask for it.

Either technology can be used for either use case, but they were originally built for different purposes and so are optimized differently.

Just like a subway train would make a pretty crappy private one-person vehicle for commuting to work and the grocery store. As would a fleet of cars be crappy for public mass transit.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's bad enough that blockchain weirdos, LLMs, and grifters like Futo have been trying to leverage the term "Open Source" in deceptive ways for one or another ulterior motive. Now sovereign citizen bullshit?

Edit: Oh. This is this user's only post after joining 2 days ago.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I doubt the term "time tangled in knots" is sufficiently well-defined for any reasonable answer. At least in terms of real-world physics.

If you're talking about scifi technobabble time tied in knots, my answer is "Looper."

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago

I don't think it would phase me that much.

In 2016 it was so out of left field. So completely unexpected.

If he wins tonight (surely he won't, but if he does...) I'll be kinda pissed and scared. I don't think I'll be moving to another country or anything. It would feel a little "been there, done that."

Don't get me wrong. I voted. I voted for Kamala. And I hope the final figures show her winning in a landslide. And I would love to see a blue majority in congress along with her victory. But I'm not expecting good things. And I'm not investing too much in the result emotionally.

If Trump won, I'd probably plan to be a little more shut-in and keep to myself more.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago

What's worse is when that asshole tickles my sinus nerves just a little, never actually letting me sneeze, but still being an annoying piece of shit.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Depending where you are moving to, snow may not be the only sort of inclement winter weather you may have to deal with. For instance, ice may build up on trees, power lines, and/or roads.

If on roads, don't drive unless you absolutely have to, and if you do, be way more careful than you think you need to be. Look up safety tips for driving in icy conditions before you have to put them into practice.

If you have any trees that might fall on anything of value, kindof watch their condition. If any are splitting down the middle, hire someone to treat them before the winter season to avoid major problems like this.

Or it's possible you'll live somewhere ice buildup is unlikely to be an issue. Maybe look into the history of the area or talk to someone who has been there a long time to find out what conditions might be an issue.

Also, the ability to work remotely is kinda nice, I guess. It's a double-edged sword, though. If you can work remotely, you never get days off due to weather. But if you can't, you may be pressured to drive into the office when it's very dangerous.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Until it makes shit up that the original work never said.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't know what TTT is, but that reminds me of this story that I just posted in response to another comment.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This reminds me of a game of Bang where I was the manipulative player. It's a hidden role game, except that the sheriff role is not hidden. The deputy, renegades, outlaws, etc were all hidden roles. The sheriff and deputy win if the outlaws all lose (get shot enough times to be out of the game). The outlaws win if the deputy and sheriff both lose. (I don't remember specifically the rules of the renegades.) Depending how may players you have, you'll have different numbers of outlaws and renegades, but there's always one sheriff and one deputy. But everybody knows how many of each there are even if they don't know who is what role.

I was an outlaw this game. And I basically just kept telling the sheriff that I was the deputy. One by one, all the other players fell, each at my insistence they'd said something suspicious and had to be an outlaw. (Basically, convincing the sheriff to start shooting a particular player is a death sentence for that player.) When only three players (the sheriff, me (an outlaw), and the deputy) remained I just kept telling the sheriff I was the deputy and trading shots with the real deputy. Eventually, the sheriff sided with me and started shooting the deputy, thinking (at my insistence) he was an outlaw.

When someone dies, they're allowed to show their role card, so the jig was up when he died. Then it was just a grueling game of the sheriff and I trading shots until one of us was unlucky enough times to take the hit that our health went to zero. I eventually won, but it took forever.

After the deputy died, he admitted that he had suspected something had gone wrong in the shuffling/dealing of role cards and somehow we'd ended up with two deputies. I was apparently that convincing.

That was the day I learned of my talent for manipulation.

 

A friend/coworker of mine and his wife hosted a weekly boardgame night that I attended. Most of the other guests were kinda flaky, and this one particular day, I was the only one who showed up. So it was just me, my friend, and his wife.

Someone suggested Dixit, which I had never played before, but it sounded fun and I was down to play. So we broke it out, shuffled, and started the game.

Now, if you don't know how Dixit works, it's basically a deck of cards with pictures on them. One of a toy abacus. Another of a child pointing a toy sword at a dragon. Another of a winding staircase with a snail at the bottom. Etc.

In one version of the game similar to Apples to Apples or Scategories, everyone gets a hand of cards which they keep hidden. The dealer announces a clue and everyone (including the dealer) contributes a card from their hands face-down to the center of the table and the dealer shuffles them together and reveals them all at once without revealing whose card is whose. Then players vote which one they think matches the clue. You get points as a player if others vote for your card or if you vote for the one the dealer picked. As a dealer, you get points if close to 50% of the players vote for yours.

I was the dealer this round. One of the cards in my hand was of a ship's anchor. That's when it came to me.

See, the friend/coworker and I both worked in web software development. His wife didn't. And I came up with the perfect play. I gave the clue "hyperlink." Hyperlinks on web pages are created using the HTML <a> tag. The "a" stands for "anchor." And any web developer would know that.

When the vote came in, I got one vote for my card from my friend and his wife failed to select the correct card and so didn't get any points. It was a slam dunk move. But I felt a little bad for excluding my friend's wife from an inside-knowledge thing.

The next round, my friend was the dealer and he picked a rule/card that was an inside-knowledge thing between the two of them. (A line from a poem they both knew well, the next line of which related to the picture of the card.) So I was glad of that.

[–] [email protected] 74 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

LLMs in medicine. What could go wrong?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 weeks ago

I've got my caps lock key remapped to escape.

I use my left pinky for ctrl, shift, a, and my remapped caps lock/escape key.

I use my right pinky for shift, enter, and I'm pretty sure that's all.

I use my ring fingers for backspace, tilde, tab, q, backslash, quote, and that probably isn't a comprehensive list.

I use my middle finger for semicolon/colon! I never realized that before. Wild.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Neat!

spoiler

  • Red. It was rubber.
  • Male.
  • Tall, thin. I don't remember a face, but he was wearing an old-fashioned formal shirt and sport jacket. The cuff of the shirt was unbuttoned and folded back. He also wore a wide-brimmed black hat. (I'm currently watching an episode of Hell on Wheels which probably influenced that.)
  • Large for an apple, small for a canteloupe.
  • Square, dinner-table-hieight. Dark-stained wood. I'm no woodworker, so I wouldn't know what kind of wood it was, but I've got a couple of bookcases of the same wood and staining.

Aside from that, I can say it took place in an old cabin and in the background, I saw an open doorway to a... foyer? The door to the outside was open. It was very sunny. And I saw green grass outside.

And, I knew all those things before I got to the questions. I just had to consult/replay the scene in my head to get all the answers.

Seems fair to say I don't have aphantasia.

 

Yesterday, I started watching a video on YouTube but closed out of my browser (Firefox) only a few minutes into the video.

I've got my Firefox set to delete all cookies, history, form data, etc on every close. (Pretty much everything but bookmarks.) The image on this post is a screenshot of my relevant settings.

Today, after having exited my browser and fully shut down my computer for a while, I remembered the video and decided to continue watching it.

In Firefox, I searched for the video (I used the search term "gnu taler" -- something worth looking into especially for folks interested in this particular Lemmy community by the way). In the search results, the video I was searching for showed the red bar at the bottom indicating I'd watched only the first few minutes of it.

Which seems weird given that I'd cleared all my browser data since I watched the first few minutes.

So I did some experimentation. I closed my browser completely again and opened it back up, searched in YouTube, and it still had the indicator. I updated to the latest version of Firefox in the Arch package repository. Same indicator. I tried the same in Chromium (which I've also got set to delete all browser data on close). Still the indicator. I installed Tor Browser Bundle (specifically torbrowser-launcher on Arch Linux), changed none of the default settings at all, and searched in YouTube. The indicator is present. In Tor Browser Bundle.

W

T

F

?

Anybody have any idea how that's possible?

My only guesses are:

  • That search is so niche as to be literally unique (which if true makes me sad -- I really hope GNU Taler takes off and becomes widespread) and YouTube is using that to identify me.
  • YouTube doesn't know where I left off at all. Not even my browser knows (because if it was my browser keeping track, it wouldn't persist between browsers). It's something else on my system that my browsers depend on or tap into.

The only other pieces of relevant info I can think to share:

  • There's another video (also about GNU Taler) that I watched all the way through the same day that I started the video this post is about. It doesn't show any indicator.
  • I tried searching on my phone's browser. No indicator. But then I'm not sure my phone ever shows indicators. I haven't tried this on any other devices on my network or anything.
  • I still haven't watched the video in question. Heh.

Thanks in advance for any insight you might have.

Edit: Sorry for neglecting to mention previously that at no point during any of the above did I log in to YouTube. And the "Sign in" button was visible at the top of the page indicating I wasn't logged in. Since multiple people asked, I figured I should edit my OP with that info.

Edit2: Two more things to mention. I think some folks are thinking I copied the link and pasted it between browsers during the above test or something? The only reason the timestamp is included in the link I posted above is because when I copied it into this post, I didn't think to remove the timestamp. But I didn't do anything like copying the link from the search results in one browser and then paste the link into TBB or anything. In each separate browser, immediately after opening the browser, I went to YouTube (by typing "youtube.com" into the address bar) and put "gnu taler" into the search bar and hit enter. And in each browser, YouTube somehow remembered where I'd left off in a whole different browser -- with a different IP address in the case of the switch from Chromium to TBB. And no urls were copied between browsers in any of the above.

The other thing to mention. Changing my search term to the full title of the video ("Building an Open Source Payment System - Sebastian Javier Marchano, Taler System" sans quotes) gives the relevant video as the top search result, but no "left off" indicator. And I'm in the Firefox in which I first noticed it had remembered.

Oh, actually, one more thing to mention. After posting this, I continued watching. I'm probably about 3/4 done with it now. But I closed my browser again before completing it, reopened my browser, and searched "gnu taler". It gives the indicator, but the position of the indicator is roughly (possibly exactly) where it was when I first noticed it had remembered. Not where I left off after watching to roughly the 3/4 mark.

Edit3: Wow! Ok. I'm 99% sure folks smarter than me have hit upon what's going on here. Thanks in particular to Tony N and Chozo for the right answer. It looks like YouTube has a feature where, depending on your search terms, it may automatically skip you a certain ways into the video. (Like "oh, you searched for 'gnu taler'? Well, in this video result, this bit in the middle is the part that's relevant to your search terms, so we'll just start you such-and-such-many seconds into the video.") The red bar doesn't mean "you've watched this" at all. And YouTube isn't "remembering me" between browsers. It's just consistently (as long as I use the specific search terms "gnu taler") suggesting that I start that video 273 seconds in rather than from the beginning. And anyone who searches that exact search term should get similar results... unless they're on mobile for some weird reason? That paired with the coincidence that I'm pretty sure I just happened to have stopped the video yesterday right about at the same place where YouTube recommends you start had me very confused. Whatever the case, I'm satisfied this must be the right answer. Thanks again, ya'll!

 

It bugs me when people say "the thing is is that" (if you listen for it, you'll start hearing it... or maybe that's something that people only do in my area.) ("What the thing is is that..." is fine. But "the thing is is that..." bugs me.)

Also, "just because doesn't mean ." That sentence structure invites one to take "just because " as a noun phrase which my brain really doesn't want to do. Just doesn't seem right. But that sentence structure is very common.

And I'm not saying there's anything objectively wrong with either of these. Language is weird and complex and beautiful. It's just fascinating that some commonly-used linguistic constructions just hit some people wrong sometimes.

Edit: I thought of another one. "As best as I can." "The best I can" is fine, "as well as I can" is good, and "as best I can" is even fine. But "as best as" hurts.

 

Over-the-counter diphenhydramine, for instance, at least in my country, says adults can take "1 to 2 tablets every 4 to 6 hours."

If you decide "my symptoms aren't so bad; I'll just take one" and then two hours later your symptoms are still bad (or worse), is it safe to take a second tab then? And if you do, should you wait until "4 to 6 hours" after taking the first tablet or the second to take an additional tablet? Does it depend on the drug? (Maybe it's fine for diphenhydramine but not for ibuprophen?)

I'd imagine blood levels of any particular drug tend to quickly spike and then exponentially decay back to undetectable levels. If you take two tabs, I'd imagine that graph is just twice as tall. If you wait a couple of hours between tabs, it's got two spikes and the second is a little higher than the first (but not as high as the two-tabs-at-the-same-time spike.)

If the concern is total concentration of drug in the bloodstream at any one point, a second tab a couple hours later is less of a concern than two tabs at the same time. If the concern is total area under the curve, then probably there's no difference between two tabs at the same time and a couple of hours between. If the concern is total time spent with a blood concentration of such-and-such, I could see there being more concern with taking a second tab just a couple of hours after the first.

And maybe there are other effects that I'm not aware of. Maybe if the blood concentration kicks up to two-tabs-at-once levels, the liver kicks into high gear, clearing the drug out quicker, but if you go a couple of hours between tabs, the liver neve kicks into high gear or some such.

And maybe this question hasn't even been well studied and maybe there's not really any good answer. But if there is, I'm curious.

 

I've got a pretty severe sensitivity to -- of all things -- sugar. (I know, "sugar" isn't very precise, but I'm pretty sure it's either glucose, fructose, or sucrose.) I virtually never eat anything with added sugar or anything with any significant amount of natural sugar. And I've eaten that way for like 20 years now. I'm practically blind to half the produce department (any "sweet" fruits like apples, pears, cherries, grapes, oranges, etc) at the grocery store, let alone the candy isle.

 

I've got a bit of a conundrum. I've got a 10 pound chihuahua whose entire world is a very specific 1.75 inch diameter rubber ball. (And when I say "entire world", I'm understating.) She's gone through a handful of this specific brand and model of rubber ball as old ones have gotten to the point of being too damaged to be safe.

But now the manufacturer has discontinued that line of ball and we're on our last one.

The few other models of rubber balls the same size that I've been able to find have been summarily rejected by the dog. I'm not sure quite what her criteria are for rejecting a ball, even. But I know she'd be a very sad dog indeed if we didn't manage to procure a suitable substitute.

So, at this point, I (and the dog too) am desperate enough to start thinking in terms of maybe crafting a ball as much like the one this dog currently loves to play with.

Of course my primary concern is safety. I wouldn't want pieces of rubber coming off of the final product to be ingested and cause blockages or anything. Nor any danger of blocking an airway.

The ball I'd be apeing is composed of natural rubber. I know you can get liquid latex like this stuff that air dries. Anyone have any idea if that would be suitable for this application? (Or would it be insufficiently durable after drying?)

I've got at my disposal a 3d printer and the skill to design 3d-printable molds. Hopefully the process of molding a ball could avoid heating the mold enough to deform it. I don't have any experience with printing anything but PLA and TPU. But I might be convinced to branch out into ABS or some such if necessary.

I'm just hoping to get some pointers and suggestions. I and my chihuahua thank you all in advance!

78
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

I love the idea of a privacy-focused fronend for YouTube, but every time I visit a piped link, it just spins forever. Both on my Linux desktop and my Android phone.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

Here is the latest one I tried and failed to load.

 

I hate that I always compare Lemmy to Reddit, but Reddit used to have (not sure if they still do) guidelines called "Reddiquette" that included guidelines about upvoting and downvoting. I don't remember the specifics (and sending too much of my browser traffic to Reddit makes me feel dirty) but one of the guidelines was not to upvote/downvote on the basis of agreement/disagreement with the content.

On Lemmy, I'm honestly a bit lax about upvoting and downvoting at all. (I'm trying to be better about it.) Buy when I do upvote/downvote, I try to do so on the basis of whether the comment/post "adds to" or "subtracts from" the community or conversation. I can disagree with one comment's take on some subject but still upvote them if they've given me a more nuanced perspective on the issue. If they're just parrotting well-known talking points and not being thoughtful with their posts, I may downvote them evren if I agree with their ultimate stance.

I'm just mostly wondering how folks on Lemmy think about upvotes/downvotes and what implications that has for the content here.

view more: next ›