This really fits my two hot takes about how we need to fix the left:

• (1) end purity tests: an imperfect ally is still an ally.
• (2) we need to appeal to centrists more; ± straight cis white men feel alienated when we talk about privilege as though it’s a bad thing. We could talk about privilege as though it’s a great thing that you should be proud of instead. Then we’d have privileged allies, which would be really helpful.

Why would you assume I don’t have the context? I have a degree in math. I could be wrong about this, I’m open-minded. By all means, please explain how infinitesimals don’t have a consistent algebra.

Not very good mathematicians if they tell you they aren’t fractions.

e^𝘪θ is not just notation. You can graph the entire function e^x+𝘪θ across the whole complex domain and find that it matches up smoothly with both the version restricted to the real axis (e^x) and the imaginary axis (e^𝘪θ). The complete version is:

e^x+𝘪θ := e^x(cos(θ) + 𝘪sin(θ))

Various proofs of this can be found on wikipeda. Since these proofs just use basic calculus, this means we didn’t need to invent any new notation along the way.

try this on – Yes 👎

It’s a fraction of two infinitesimals. Infinitesimals aren’t numbers, however, they have their own algebra and can be manipulated algebraically. It so happens that a fraction of two infinitesimals behaves as a derivative.

I guess Ty changed their name

oh huh, neat. Always though of those as “operations.”

In Comp-Sci, operators mean stuff like >>, *, /, + and so on. But in math, an operator is a (possibly symbollic) function, such as a derivative or matrix.

it’s legit a fraction, just the numerator and denominator aren’t numbers.

I get these kind of reactions on Lemmy all the time. I say something that isn’t the exact party line, people assume I’m their worst enemy even though our disagreement is very minor in the broad scheme.

Makes sense. Author is a psychologist.

My support for abortion is grounded in my belief that zygotes don’t have souls. I don’t know if I would support abortion in general without believing this. Here are some things you can try, assuming that you’re talking with a rational person:

• Zygotes don’t have a nervous system, the house of the soul, at all; so they can’t have a soul. Even longer until they have brain activity.
• Even their brain activity and complexity is nothing compared to that of, say, a chicken. So if you’re fine with eating chicken, you should be fine with abortions.
• If you were in a burning building, and only had time to save one, which would you save? (a) a crying 5-year old, or (b) a thousand fertilized embryos on a tray.

that would be debating these “chuclefucks”

criminalizes abortions only after a fetus can survive outside the womb

Out of curiosity, when is this? Like 7 months? I’d say this is pretty decent, hardly anyone gets an abortion past 7 months anyway.

fair enough, my habit is to go for relatively neutral words such as “dislike” to encapsulate a broader spectrum of people.

Fun fact: everyone who didn’t vote for Hitler made it through the war with a 100% clean conscience, and did not regret any other inactions. /s

It’s not brute-force to a better algorithm per se. It’s the same algorithm, exactly as “stupid,” just with more force (more numerous and powerful GPUs) running it.

Three are benchmarks to check if the model is “good” – for instance, how well the model does on standardized tests similar to SATs (researchers are very careful to ensure that the questions do not appear on the internet anywhere, so that the model can’t just memorize the answers.)

I think a different way to look at what you’ve brought up in the second paragraph is that people are angry and talking about the power usage because the dislike AI, not the other way around. It doesn’t really make sense for people to be angry about the power usage of AI if the power usage had no environmental impact.

I think you’re just being an ignorant fool. People are closeted and hate themselves because there is no choice to not be LGBT. Do you disagree with this? Do you think it’s a choice? Newsflash: it’s not.

Something can be both not a choice and not genetic.

No. I’m not aware of any evidence that one is born with the propensity to be LGBT. It’s well-known that it’s not a choice, but that is not the same as saying that you’re genetically predetermined to be LGBT. Twin studies disprove that.

My understanding is that the current prevailing belief among psychologists is that sexual orientation develops during adolescence, and is either random or influenced in some way by one’s sexual exposure, but not necessarily in any obviously deterministic way.

Any direct, unqualified statement of, “you are born different” is directly and completely wrong.