🜛∞

Created:
Traction Theory for division by zero
VexelRay Framework for desktop GUI/UX
Pontif Programming Language for perfection
Alchemist, Technoking

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@BullForceOne Yeah, unfortunately the marketing industry has gotten very effective at convincing people to believe absolute nonsense. Literally everything in the common zeitgeist is backwards. Opinions, sold to the highest bidder.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

Anyone who thinks "billionaires shouldnt exist" is literally promoting fascism whether they realize it or not.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@BullForceOne I dont need to convince anyone of anything. It's the truth whether people like it or not. And its not even a good debate to have - people would be much better off if they actually understood what was happening, but they fall for the psy-ops every single time.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@BullForceOne The rich dont need to be poor, just like how the poor dont need to be rich. And there will always be people who gain more wealth than others - true "equity" is impossible. This is regardless of politics, religion, government, or lack thereof.

Human rights are earned, not granted

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@BullForceOne what's your solution?

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

I dont have a math degree, yet I still get the two confused all the time.

Lets just call it "for-jective" and "back-jective."

[Structural Econometrics Truther @MetricsTruther]

i have a math degree and still don't know which is surjective and which is injective. please stop using those words. they hurt my wee brain

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@mathelirium i doubt the force was exerted by the "electron spin".

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@BullForceOne Yes, focus on the broken system, not the billionaires.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@uriahz @alz_zyd_ You could say that about China, after all Elon does have a factory there. But Russia? Elon doesnt do business here. He doesnt like the Russians because they wouldnt sell him an ICBM when he decided to start SpaceX lol

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@3divac @CankayKoryak what your describing sounds a lot more like coarse-graining than "quantum smear". What is my exact location? Is it my street address? or my lat/long? Let's use lat/long and forget about elevation for a moment: if you zoom in far enough, you'll find that I'm not at a single point

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@3divac @CankayKoryak I don't accept your analogy.

Comparing QM to classic mechanics is like comparing a cup of water to an ocean: exactly the same thing, but at wildly different scales. Calling them "apples and oranges" without describing the thing that makes them different is a cop out.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@NoahChrein You didnt answer the first part of my question, and your answer to the second actually walks it back. Are you saying mathematicians and big tech both win? Because your OP implies otherwise...

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@3divac @CankayKoryak Right, calling QM indeterministic means either a) I dont have enough information to determine it or b) it is generally indeterministic and will always be. When spoken by a scientist, they usually imply (b), but really it's just (a).

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

Whether you're on a PC, Mac, or Linux computer, you use windows. Thats what we call the frame around each program: a window.

So how does Windows legally keep their trademark, considering it's part of the vernacular now?

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@1a1n1d1y heres one that will leave you scratching your head.

Why don't waves on the surface of water travel as fast as sound waves going through it?

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@Anthony_Bonato Ah, you misspelled "developers".

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@3divac @CankayKoryak I dont believe that's an accurate portrayal of Newton's laws. It doesnt account for torque, at least.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@codewith55 You dont check for duplicates. UUID is used when checking for duplicates isnt feasible.

Odds of a collision is 1 in 10^80.

Thats the number of atoms in the observable universe.

I'd say you're safe.

[🜛∞ @DoozerDiffuser]

@CankayKoryak I dont think better detectors will do it.

Does a better microscope help you, if you're in a pitch black cave with no photons bouncing around?

Does a better telescope reveal what's inside a black hole?

I think our brains are wired to understand observation as a passive activity