snek_boi

@snek_boi@lemmy.ml

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

snek_boi ,

It seems like you’re passionate about emojis

snek_boi OP ,

Thanks for the reply! Here's their 2024-5-8 reply for reference:

Hi!
Our engineers have conducted a thorough analysis of this threat, reconstructed it experimentally, and tested it on Proton VPN.
We concluded that:

  • the attack can only be carried out if the local network itself is compromised
  • our Windows and Android apps are fully protected against it
  • for iOS and macOS apps, you are completely protected from this as long as you're using a Kill Switch and a WireGuard-based protocol (our apps use WireGuard by default, and if a user wants to use something other than WireGuard derivates, they'd have to manually set it up). Note that Stealth, WireGuard TCP, and our Smart protocol on iOS/macOS are all WireGuard-based.
  • for our Linux app, we're working on a fix that would provide full protection against it.
snek_boi ,

It actually took me a while to realize he was not wearing the clothes of a McDonald's worker.

snek_boi ,

I feel bad for the stray dog or fox that gets confused with this imaginary creature.

snek_boi ,

I’m sure this is a quality shitpost, but I don’t get it 😅 Can someone explain the context for this?

snek_boi ,

Ah. Thanks for taking the time to explain the meme's context!

Are there any online or in-person communities dedicated to minimizing the influence advertising has on its members? Do you know any strategies to minimize this effect on you?

Is there a lemmy community, for example, where people discuss shopping strategies which minimize the risk of the purchase decision being influenced by Brand Image or Flashy Packaging? Or similar topics....

snek_boi ,

The book Influence by Cialdini not only talks about the levers of influence, but how to minimize their impact.

snek_boi ,

I love how you put it. I think the particular consequences of not making money quickly enough is pulling the plug in projects. Investors want money, not games.

snek_boi OP ,

Oh… I wonder how expensive using that bathtub is. Are they rare? Like, would almost any hospital have one?

snek_boi OP , (edited )

I think I just exposed how expensive and rare I think kidney-stone treatments are…

Edit: clarity

snek_boi ,

You seem to be doing quite some things well. Maybe pay attention to your brushing? My dentist once had me brush my teeth in front of her and identified why in some teeth I’d consistently be clean and in others I’d consistently build plaque.

Her recommendations: brush from the gum to the tip of the tooth. Try to aim at the holes between teeth. Pay close attention to the part in front of your tongue, in your lower front teeth; that part can easily build plaque if you don’t use the tip of your brush well to get in the holes between your teeth.

snek_boi ,

Or mammal supremacist. Or vertebrate supremacist. There are options

snek_boi ,

Out of curiosity, what makes you say so?

Edit: Oh. Did a “Wooosh” happen to me right now? Are you being ironic and referring to the XKCD thing about how to make a secure password using words in phrases?

snek_boi ,

Could this backfire? Like, sure, no combustion engines, but that would be solved in the long run with electricity. But are there things I’m forgetting that would be critical? Like a chemical process for critical chemicals that requires explosions or something like that.

snek_boi ,

Metacognition becomes routine for humans. We are able to better de-fuse from our thoughts, and recognize them not as reality but as thoughts about reality.

snek_boi ,

We all have thoughts in our head. They are the lenses through which we see reality.

Sometimes, we are aware of that. For example, we may realize we’re being prejudiced or that we’re being cranky because of our mood.

However, this uses up a lot of energy; our frontal lobe is very energy-hungry. So we spend most of the time thinking habitual thoughts and following habitual behaviors. We don’t realize we’re looking at reality through a lens. We assume we are simply looking at reality.

What I am wishing for is for people to constantly be aware that the way they are looking at reality depends on the lenses they have learned and habitually use.

snek_boi , (edited )

The way string of any material is woven should be durable. But plastic can be a magical material. It doesn’t cool when wet, regardless of whether it’s got fat on it (unlike wool, which requires lanolin). And its cheapness makes it readily available to billions of people.

To be clear, yes, we should avoid overproduction and overconsumption of plastic. Yes, we should research cheap ways of making durable and waterproof/still-warm-when-wet clothes that are biodegradable. Yes, we should require good filters in every washing machine and dryer so that we don’t get full of microplastics.

snek_boi ,

I’m glad that you have such a nice experience with your pens, but I don’t know if this is a showerthought :(

Professors who grade the same exam dozens or hundreds of times probably experience semantic satiation (explained in the body of the post).

Semantic satiation happens when repeating word or a phrase over and over makes it temporarily lose its meaning. This was first written about in the psychological literature by Titchener, in case you search it online and find that name....

snek_boi ,

I get that this could be making fun of the idea that a hypothesis is different to a theory, but there are epistemic stances that don't distinguish between either. From that perspective, both a hypothesis and a theory answer the question of "What do you think is happening here?"

snek_boi ,

What do you mean by “margin of error”?

snek_boi , (edited )

EDIT BEINGS HERE

So I actually watched a talk by the person who coinded “enshittification”, Cory Doctorow, recently, and I have changed my perspective about Kagi. I no longer think Kagi is doomed to enshittify.

Enshittification requires advertisers. As long as Kagi finances itself with money that does not come from advertisers, it will not enshittify.

This does not mean that it’s not problematic that their code is closed-source.

EDIT ENDS HERE

I like what I hear about the user experience, but there are many problems I see with the service.

For one, it’s based in the USA, so it is legally subject to the insane, antidemocratic, and awful state surveillance there.

It is also a corporation, so it is subject to enshittification. Currently, it is giving users loads of stuff so that users use it, but sooner or later investors will want their money back and Kagi will enshittify.

Finally, these two problems would be mitigated by open-sourcing and making libre their software. With that, alternatives in more sensible legislatures could open. Users could migrate to instances that are still libre and not enshittified.

It is really unfortunate that Kagi is doing so many things well while doing some fundamental things terribly. As it stands, Kagi is doomed to enshittify.

snek_boi ,

I think most of the criticism on Telegraph regarding how Matrix handles rooms and events are addressed by the work behind linearized matrix: www.qwant.com/?l=en&q=linearized+matrix+messa…

As income or wealth inequality changes, so could the composition of students in elite universities. There could be different proportions of legacy students.

I also wonder whether there could be factors that determine how many students would be considered wondrous or how many would be considered more extrinsically motivated.

snek_boi OP ,

Thanks! I changed the post so that it reflects the broader concept rather than the specific indicator :)

snek_boi OP ,
snek_boi OP , (edited )

lol I see how this shower-thought can seem obvious.

What lead to the shower-thought was thinking about dimensions in linear algebra. If you want to represent a function with more parameters, you need more dimensions.

For example, two parameters could be represented by ax + by = c where a, b, and c are constants and x and y are real numbers. Note that this equation describes a 2-D plane. Three parameters would require an additional variable and an associated constant: ax + by + cz = d, where d is an additional constant and z is an additional real number. Note that this equation describes a 3-D space.

Can you see how if you wanted to represent four parameters, you would need four dimensions?

However, facet plots seem to override this need for more dimensions in a particular way: splitting up axes, like cutting up a cake. If you have four parameters (in which two of them can only take up discrete values), instead of requiring four dimensions, you can split up two dimensions in discrete chunks, like a cake, and represent four parameters in two dimensions. That was interesting for me to realize.

I guess for cake-cutters, this post is silly and trivial. But for someone trained to think “more parameters = more dimensions in the sense of going from ax + by = c to ax + by + cz = d”, it was surprising to realize facet plots break that rule.

The reason the internet can hook us more than a book is that the internet responds to us. If we get tired, we can dumb down our surfing, but dumbing down what you're reading is harder.

Dumbing down doesn’t mean “philosophy versus Call of Duty”. It just means what’s intuitive versus what takes conscious effort. Heck, Call of Duty could demand conscious effort.

snek_boi OP ,

You’re right :) what I mean is that the internet demands a couple of keystrokes or a click to change content. A book may require getting up from my chair, or worse, going to a store and waiting a couple of days for them to get the book I want.

snek_boi OP ,

I see what you did there with the word “novel” 👀

We're the creators of Lemmy, Ask Us Anything. *Starts Monday, 7 Aug, 1500 CEST*

This is an opportunity for any users, server admins, or interested third parties to ask anything they’d like to @nutomic and I about Lemmy. This includes its development and future, as well as wider issues relevant to the social media landscape today....

snek_boi ,

I see how majority judgement could be seen as a subset of range or score voting.

A crucial difference between range/score voting and majority judgement is that one uses numbers and the others judgements. A majority judgement ballot could list all the possible candidates or options, and for each of them, there’d be a list of possible judgements. You can say that you consider a candidate “terrible”, “bad”, “meh”, “good”, “amazing”.

The idea is that humans tend to think in terms of judgements more readily than with numbers. A good ballot would find what words evoke useful judgements for candidates, as each group of voters has its own social language.

For example, with my partner we have a list of movies that we vote on. We have judgements that include “I’ll leave the house if you play that sh*t”, or “Omg yes!”. It’s great to add a movie to the list and find that one of the judgements in our made up ballot matches our personal judgements so well!

This is something I think majority judgement can do better than range/score voting: it can reflect human judgements better than with scores. In that way, it is more intuitive than range/score voting.

One benefit of majority judgement is that leaders chosen through it would know the judgement that they came into power with. If someone is elected into a powerful role knowing that half of the voters think they’re “ideal” for the job, that’s quite different than knowing that they were elected with half the voters thinking they were “inadequate”. This means, ideally, that the legitimacy of incompetent leaders can be reduced.

Note that the amount of possible judgements in a ballot can vary. To make things quick and easy, I’ve had silly elections with three judgements, such as “nope”, “ok”, “omg yes”. I’ve also had elections with nine judgements.

If you want to reduce the probability of having multiple winners, more judgements are a good idea. In general, the amount of judgements should depend on what the stakes are (higher stakes should go beyond just a couple of judgements), how many options there are (few options require few judgements), and the amount of voters there are (few voters require many judgements).

I think the reason for using the median is so that a judgement can be chosen as representative of each candidate. In the “nope”, “ok”, “omg yes” example above, if the median of the winning candidate is 3, you can tell the candidate that the score that they were chosen with was “omg yes”. If the average of the winning candidate is 2.4, you can’t really translate that as succintly, given that 2.4 is between “ok” and “omg yes”.

I hope it’s clearer why I love this voting method!

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • news
  • movies
  • leopardsatemyface
  • stillalive
  • ServerNonsense
  • istillthinkofyou
  • oneorangebraincell
  • MBBS
  • All magazines