Avatar

yetAnotherUser

yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
Joined
0 posts • 9 comments

Hi!

My previous/alt account is yetAnotherUser@feddit.de which will be abandoned soon.

Direct message

Fair enough, I’m far from an expert when it comes to working with these tools.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I’m not a graphics designer, I just occasionally dabble in GIMP. Is it really that bad or is it just different from Adobe? I’ve had some issues at first because the GUI is not intuitive in the slightest but I kind of enjoy the workflow now.

Although the most complicated thing I’ve ever done was recreating an AI generated logo with actual symmetry, logic and around 20 layers.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Just put the boulder in the first room and tell the guest to deal with it. What are they gonna do? Sisyphus has a massive boulder and plenty of muscle mass to deal with an unfriendly hotel roommate.

permalink
report
reply

Why did she sugraysplotchked her teachers dpurplesplotch?

permalink
report
reply

Ragebait never fails to work.

How many replies, likes and retweets does the average CNN Twitter post have? I bet this one has more.

Also this screenshot is from 2019 and the crux of the article is:

The robots used in the study are clearly robots but have human-like limbs and a head, with exterior complexions that are white – which is to say, pinkish – or black – really, a deep brown.

permalink
report
reply

You don’t necessarily need speech for consent since non-verbal/mute people exist.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Yes, but similar flaws exist for your proof.

The algebraic proof that 0.999… = 1 must first prove why you can assign 0.999… to x.

My “proof” abuses algebraic notation like this - you cannot assign infinity to a variable. After that, regular algebraic rules become meaningless.

The proper proof would use the definition that the value of a limit approaching another value is exactly that value. For any epsilon > 0, 0.999… will be within the epsilon environment of 1 (= the interval 1 ± epsilon), therefore 0.999… is 1.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Unfortunately not an ideal proof.

It makes certain assumptions:

  1. That a number 0.999… exists and is well-defined
  2. That multiplication and subtraction for this number work as expected

Similarly, I could prove that the number which consists of infinite 9’s to the left of the decimal separator is equal to -1:

...999.0 = x
...990.0 = 10x

Calculate x - 10x:

x - 10x = ...999.0 - ...990.0
-9x = 9
x = -1

And while this is true for 10-adic numbers, it is certainly not true for the real numbers.

permalink
report
parent
reply