Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Everyone is doing a terrible job of explaining, but they’re right.

Gravity, 1G, is described on terms of an acceleration. 9.81m/s2.

What is an acceleration? Is is the rate of change of a velocity. If a velocity changes slowly, it means the acceleration is low. If the velocity changes quickly, the acceleration is high.

Now, imagining a record player. Or cd player. Or your spinning wheel of choice:

You know that points farther away from the center are moving faster in absolute terms compared to points closer to the center.

Because the points farther from the center have a larger velocity, that means after some rotation, the total change of velocity for the outer points must be larger than the change of velocity for inner points. So, points farther away must have greater acceleration.

So, the apparent acceleration changes according to how far things are from the center point. This is why it really isn’t the case that it would be 1G everywhere. 1G is a specific acceleration, if if we’ve established that acceleration isn’t constant across the radius, then it can be 1 G only at one spot, not all.

There was recently a “design proposal” (more of a published thought experiment) I read (posted on lemmy) where the authors had figured out the diameter required such that the gravity differential from feet to head wouldn’t be weird. It was quite large if I recall.

Really wish there was the complete data set rather than just looking at the immediate run up to the dot Com burst, and then from that peak to the trough of the aftermath of the 08 crash.

My idiot cat loves vacuums. Dives in front if them like they’re security taking a bullet for some VIP.

She wants to get vacuumed. Makes hair management pretty easy since she’ll enthusiastically let us vacuum the source.

IPoAC is my personal favorite

“Relationship Builder”

Outsources interacting with thier own children.

That is roughly the premise of Beavis and Butthead

People run whisper on HA, and there already exist intention mapping packages. They’ve been around for probably a decade already. Pretty hit or miss… mostly because there isn’t a ton of flexibility in the structure of the commands you issue it.

If someone wanted to use an online LLM to attempt to translate a complex whisper transcription into something an existing intention mapped would handle well, that’s closer to a day’s worth of goofing around rather than a year. I actually refuse to believe it hasn’t already been done.

And if you’re using an online llm to do that translation, I don’t see why that can’t be behind a paywall either.

Honestly for this task, I imagine offline models would be sufficient.

I dunno. Timeliness seems reasonable.

AGI in 18 months. Start a timer in 12. I think a clock is roughly 66% of the complexity of AGI. Math checks out.

Give me a P!

Imagine having to, because the most self-righteous, selfish people that possibly exist, opted to take “absolutr worst” over “bad”… and are still justifying it. Still lording thier moral superiority over the rest of us. Still incapable of grasping that thier self satisfaction came at a tangible cost to humans lives.

A big part of maturity, perhaps all of it, is recognizing that sometimes, you do need to degrade yourselves for others. Maybe not even to make things good for them, even just less bad.

Does it make me feel good to boil this down to an analogy like I’m talking to a 2 year old? No. It’s degrading to say. I expect it’s degrading to hear. But some people still don’t get it.

The original person I responded to was describing the paradox as a social contract, and I was saying I don’t think it really makes sense conceptually as a social contract for reasons. What I’m hearing you say is that it it prescribes nothing, so I would infer that to mean that is isn’t really an agreement either, so not really a social contract either.

I still get the feeling that we’re roughly at the same place but took different paths to get there

For the record, what makes it smell like propaganda is that I actually do think you’re very aware of the pros and cons, and that you keep leading with the currency argument when it’s by far the weakest argument. It’s the most emotionally persuasive argument,however, because it’s suggesting Canadians part with a tangible everyday item. People were flustered losing the penny. It pulls emotional levers that simply are not pulled by things like budget deficits and Dutch elm disease. It pulls emotional levels that need not be pulled or even approached because the point is settled already by Article 49. I think you absolutely know all of this, and that is my point.

With precedent of an opt-out clause.

There are plenty of reasons to join or not join a union of any kind.

“But Canada would be forced onto the Euro” to me reads as straight propaganda because it acts directly as an identity wedge. This is even before it not being strictly true.

If you’re concerned about Canada joining the EU, you can merely state that article 49 restricts membership to European states, and it has already been tested by Morocco.

It has been tested and Morocco didn’t make the cut. I think it’d be a tough sell to argue Canada does when Morocco doesn’t.

Canada technically administers a small parcel of land in France, and Canada has a land border with an EU state.

I do think that if Canada was genuinely prepared and unambiguously politically willing to join the EU, that the rules would get rewritten. Canada would be the 4th largest economy in the EU.

I think any hesitation on the EU side would be basic trust that they aren’t going to get jerked around by another primarily English speaking country, or have the country fall prey to unsavoury North American politics. I feel like Canada would need to do some PR work to distance ourselves from the UK and USA.

Adopting the Euro isn’t a requirement, so kinda a weird thing to say.

2 successive generations at 20 years isn’t statistically typical in north America in the last 60 years.

The math checks out, but isn’t a median representation.

There is some nuance. Talking someone into or out of anything usually gets pretty easy if you can convince them it’s part of thier identity. Generational identity is absolutely a propaganda tool… but once you recognize this, it becomes apparent that it cuts both ways

When I was a kid I used to make bows and arrows, and so obviously lit arrows on fire.

You for sure need an accelerant. I recall personally using gas line antifreeze. Otherwise yeah they’ll extinguish pretty much instantly.

I can’t really remember if the flaming arrows “flamed” the whole flight, or if they extinguished in flight but because of the accelerant were able to reignite once they stopped.