CanadaPlus

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

I like how the title was confusing, but seeing the actual picture has only made it worse.

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

Yeah. What's their game here, basically? They're hella brutal in most (all?) other ways.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

The specific model is rechargeable, unless I'm misunderstanding you.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Has he actually given up on the Metaverse thing at this point?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Oh, the second paragraph of my comment, not the article. Kyiv Independent is questionable as a source, basically.

Sorry for calling you a bot.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Clearly, you can speak English quite well, just not understand it.

I actually can respond to this, for the real people reading. KMT isn't pro-China, just more confrontation averse with them. These are the guys that fought Mao, right? And, they lost the last election handily to the radical anti-Chinese candidate. Not sure WTF is up with the claim about the president.

But, we were never talking about Taiwan, and definitely not about the Uighur genocide.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Lol. In 2025 your propaganda bot should be able to scan conversations better than this one.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

For Lemmings from other areas, it doesn't read like a warning, exactly, but in the context of what ~~the Alberta government~~ literally this minster has been doing it kind of is.

Edit: Didn't notice this is signed Devin Dreeshen.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This government has blown up one Calgary transport plan already (they're literally building two halves that don't enter downtown at all now), so that may or may not be wise. Cities don't really have constitutional protections in Canada or Alberta.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Without checking the context, Iran and their proxies got hit a bunch and turned the other cheek, so in the game theoretic sense, yes, none of their threats will be credible now.

The conventional smart move would have been to start gradually blowing Isreali and American stuff up the moment Hazbollah was attacked. It sounds they might actually have some kind of twisted, theocratic idealism that got in the way of that.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

I'm pretty sure the trend didn't come from nowhere, although like every other fashion most adherents wouldn't have necessarily chosen it in a vacuum.

Whether that makes the preference less valid is an interesting question of it's own.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/37414239

I've read the old papers proving that fact, but honestly it seems like some of the terminology and notation has changed since the 70's, and I roundly can't make heads or tails of it. The other sources I can find are in textbooks that I don't own.

Ideally, what I'm hoping for is a segment of pseudocode or some modern language that generates an n-character string from some kind of seed, which then cannot be recognised in linear time.

It's of interest to me just because, coming from other areas of math where inverting a bijective function is routine, it's highly unintuitive that you provably can't sometimes in complexity theory.

 

I've read the old papers proving that fact, but honestly it seems like some of the terminology and notation has changed since the 70's, and I roundly can't make heads or tails of it. The other sources I can find are in textbooks that I don't own.

Ideally, what I'm hoping for is a segment of pseudocode or some modern language that generates an n-character string from some kind of seed, which then cannot be recognised in linear time.

It's of interest to me just because, coming from other areas of math where inverting a bijective function is routine, it's highly unintuitive that you provably can't sometimes in complexity theory.

 

So, this ate up a full day. Thought someone else might think it was neat. The rules were I allowed myself to look up dates, but not whole new figures I wasn't familiar with, and the goal was to go as far back as possible:

Greta Thunberg 2003-
Emannuel Macron 1977-
Roger Penrose 1931-
Elizabeth II 1926-2022
Albert Einstein 1879-1955
Franz-Joseph I 1830-1916
Victoria I 1819-1901
Nepoleon Bonaparte 1769-1821
Benjamin Franklin 1706-1790
Isaac Newton 1642-1727
Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
William Shakespeare 1564-1616
Elizabeth I 1533-1603
Henry VIII 1491-1547
Christopher Colombus 1451-1506
Mehmed the Conquerer 1432-1481
Zheng He 1371-1433
Geoffrey Chaucer 1343-1400
Wat Tyler 1341-1381
Ibn Buttata 1304-1368
Marco Polo 1254-1324
Kublai Khan 1215-1294
Fibbonacci 1170-1245
Ghengis Khan 1162-1227
Saladin 1138-1193
Averroes 1126-1198
Ismail Al-Jazari 1136–1206
Muhammad al-Idrisi 1100-1165
Al-Ghazali 1058-1111
Alexios I Komnenos 1057-1118
Pope Urban II 1035-1099
Willie the Bastard 1028-1087
Avicenna 980-1037
Leif Erikson 975-1020
Erik the Red 950-1003
Herald Fairhair 850-932
Ingolfr Arnarson 849-910
Al-Khwarizmi 780-850
Charlemagne 748-814
Pope Gregory III Unk.-741
An Lushan 703-757
Charles Martel 688-741
Bede 673-735
Empress Wu Zetian 624-705
Aisha bint Abi-Bakr 614-678
Emporer Taizhong 598-649
Prophet Muhammad 570-632
Maurice I 582-602
Gregory of Tours 538-594
Brendan the Navigator 484-577
Justinian I 482-565
Clovis I 466-511
Aleric II 460-507
Theodoric the Great 454-526
Odoacer 433-493
Attila the Hun 406-453
Aleric I 370-411
Theodosius the Great 347-395
Valentinian the Great 321-375
Constantine the Great 272-337
Diocletian 242-311
Valarian 199-264
Ardashir I 180-242
Philip the Arab 204-249
Commodus 161-192
Septimus Severus 145-211
Antoninus 86-161
Hadrian 76-138
Pliny the Younger 61-113
Trajan 53-117
Pliny the Elder 23-79
Josephus 37-100
Nero 37-68
Caligula 12-41
Wang Mang 46-23 BC
Augustus 63-14 BC
Virgil 70-19 BC
Herod the Great 72-4 BC
Julius Caesar 100-44 BC
Pompey 106-48 BC
Cicero 106-43 BC
Cato the Younger 95-46 BC
Gaius Marius 157-86 BC
Gaius Graccus 154-121 BC
Tiberius Graccus 163-133 BC
Hipparchus 190-120 BC
Cato the Elder 234-149 BC
Hannibal 247-183 BC
Archimedes 287-212 BC
Pyrrus 319-272 BC
Epicurus 341-270 BC
Alexander the Great 353-323 BC
Aristotle 384-322 BC
Plato 427-348 BC
Socrates 470-399 BC
Euripedes 480-406 BC
Xerxes I 518-465 BC
Darius the Great 550-486 BC
Croesus 585-546 BC
Cyrus the Great 600-530 BC
Nebuchadnezzar II the Great 605-562 BC
Sappho 630-570 BC

At this point I crapped out, because I hadn't read about Ashurbanipal yet. If I had, I could have gone a few further:

Ashurbanipal 685-631 BC
Taharqa Ukn.-664 BC
Sennacherib 705-681 BC
Sargon II 770-705 BC

Unfortunately my East Asian history is ass, and I'm still not sure about the deeds of You of Zhou, so it ends there. The early 1100's were also weirdly hard, although I'm not sure why - thank god for al-Idrisi's map.

A few things that surprised me: Fibbonacci could have met Ghengis Khan, Benjamin Franklin could have talked to Isaac Newton, and Galileo was literally the same age as Shakespeare.

 

The Wikipedia article on Steiner constructions mentions it, but doesn't explain it, and the source linked is a book I don't have. This has come up in a practical project.

 

In air. This seems like it should be incredibly basic information but I can't find it anywhere.

 

If not, that seems like a good argument in favour of finitism. If so, what if anything does it mean if you solve it by brute force?

 

Paul Cohen I understand constructed such a set of axioms, which logically imply the existence of an evil set family like that. Constructive is of course preferred for extra WTF.

 

The cyclic group case is the discrete logarithm problem, but I don't know what keyword to use for other cases.

What I'm really interested in is the symmetric group. If I have a fixed set of permutations, how do i combine them into the one I want?

view more: next ›