u/Arbitrary_Pseudonym

FWIW, the author ended the series with a note on how they were going to do more, but hit their limit on what it felt like to really get into the mind of a monster - it was wearing on them because of how fucked up it was.

That is to say, they knew it was awful; they kept going because it was awful; the more awful it was, the more monstrous it was; the more monstrous it was, the deeper they got into what it meant to be a monster. They dove as deep as they possibly could - largely just to find out.

In that way, once you've read the series, well, everything else pales in comparison. It's kinda weird.

Also, the author has written stuff that's not actively fucked-up. Try out The Stars Have Eyes; it's actually adorable.

r/llmphysics

If your computer is sending a DHCP discover and it is arriving at the DHCP server of a different VLAN, that means that it traversed from one VLAN to the other or that there is something wonky with the DHCP server connectivity/configuration.

It's really that simple.

I've always wondered about this. Like, obviously it's going to be sour as hell, but how much will it ruin the perfect clear flatness after the lick?

Alcohol was my #1 trigger, and it's a pretty common one for many people - but quitting it wasn't enough to stop my seizures. For some people it is though; we're all different.

If you can give up alcohol, do it, but if the seizure med you try is unbearable, try a different one. The "medication dance" can take a long time (because usually you have to do at least 2 weeks to see if the stuff is tolerable/if it works, and then you have to wean up onto a new one, then wean off the old one, then wait 2 weeks to see if the new one is good enough...it's a long process) but it's worth doing.

Looks more like southwest Colorado to me

ready to ride

I'd put this as "ready to go through a very clearly-laid-out and coherent setup guide and then ride" myself.

It's not hard to do, but its certainly different from the "open up the box, turn on, then ride" aspect of OW.

Looks a bit like an Ising spin lattice settling down, but in 3d: https://mattbierbaum.github.io/ising.js/

The overall mechanics aren't too far off from one another - the Ising model is just much, much more simple.

be me, junior ISP tech configuring router in preparation to send to site start off by clearing config wr er, re why did the console lock up oh shit that wasn't my terminal server, that was the core switch for a neighboring small town

Well, so here's the thing: There are some very large-scale civil engineering projects that have been done in the past which required a lot of explosives - far, far more in terms of sheer mass than the number of nukes would have required, and that means the manufacturing was as a whole is damaging.

If we could have avoided the radioactive fallout entirely by scattering a bunch of lead, it's likely that use of nuclear explosions for civil engineering projects would have become fairly commonplace - because not only would it be cheaper, it would be cleaner too.

So, yeah, it's unintuitive, but you have to remember that the alternative to this kind of thing can be worse.

Honestly this one got me until I went through frame-by-frame in that section and saw what you meant. The part that's scariest about this effect to me is that a lot of modern smartphone cameras are using AI to upscale the resolution of images and videos taken with them - they use multiple pixels to sample light more rapidly to achieve low-noise, but lower-resolution imagery, and then to get "quality" the AI comes in to "save the day". This ends up resulting in its own weird set of artifacts which can include thin objects seemingly warping in and out of existence.

This one's clearly AI if you look closely enough, but the fact that non-AI videos are also starting to look like AI themselves is making it harder and harder to tell.

FWIW though, an earlier sign of something being wrong is that one of the snakes in her hand has its tail drooping about halfway down, but then it goes back up all the way to her hand to wrap around it and twirl about. Real snakes don't do that; they might lift their own heads up, but they never do the same thing with their tails. I actually did this kind of thing as a kid (catch snakes, sometimes in handfuls during frog spawning seasons when the snakes came out to hunt) when I went camping, so as I look more closely it looks more and more like AI.

sigh

Hmm, odd. I never touched themes before today :/

You don't ever want your tail to drag or your nose to hit the ground. The tl;dr is that it hitting the ground makes it way harder to adjust your center of mass to avoid flipping forward.

Imagine that you are holding a plank with a tripod on top of it while you're riding, and that you brake. If you don't tilt the plank enough as you brake, then the tripod will tilt over forwards. If you tilt it too much it will fall over backwards. The shorter the tripod (or lower its center of mass as compared to the width of the legs) the less tilt is required. The harder you brake, the steeper an angle you need to tilt the plank to prevent the tripod from tilting over. If you are unable to tilt the board beyond a certain angle, the tripod WILL fall over, and the only way for it not to is to have it dynamically shift its center of mass.

You are the tripod and can dynamically shift your center of mass. Motor braking is proportional to tilt and maxes out once the tail hits the ground. Friction braking then takes effect, which is proportional to the weight on your back foot but also inversely proportional to speed - so the harder you brake, the slower you go, which then increases the braking force, which is the opposite of how braking usually works: This means that your controls become inverted.

Then, assuming you don't eat shit immediately and survive into the inverted-controls phase, you will at some point slow down enough that you need to adjust your balance forward in preparation for the controls to un-invert. If you do it too early, you fall forward. If you do it too late, you fall backwards. The timing and all of the dynamic processes related to the kinetic friction are all dependent on the type of surface you're riding on.

Tail stiffness (adjustable with VESC, idk about OW these days) can be used to let you get more braking force and avoid that situation entirely. It's best to just...not get into that boat, because it's different depending on every environmental variable you can think of.

Oh, I know. I currently work at a corporation where PMs are pushed by higher-up PMs who are pushed by VIPs to release new features and are essentially rated on throughput of releases, and who hire on artists (who have zero experience with the technology of the system they're designing a UI for) to draw up drafts for a UI change that nobody asked for.

The PMs themselves also don't have much experience in the field, and the software developers who take on the task of making the UI that the artists sketched up are completely detached from the nature and purpose of what they are building. Here's an example.

Recently they've been working hard to make it so that the sidebar of the main page doesn't have to reload every time that users navigate between pages because it will increase page performance, but when I called out that actual users tend to open dozens of individual tabs as part of their usual workflow, they didn't know how to respond because they just didn't consider that. I asked them if their planned changes would also improve performance there, and they admitted it would actually be slower, so I pointed out that they might need to change their approach, and they responded with "we'll have to discuss with PM how we're going to approach this issue. We might not be able to support that use case though" - and when I pointed out that it is the primary workflow of over 99% of users they kinda just...went silent. As the last few months have gone by, things have only gotten slower.

SOMETIMES I'm able to step in the way of PMs before they start pushing their bad ideas forward and convince them to make something good, but it's hard. It's all driven by the people who are at the top, and all of them are currently in full AI-psychosis.

:( well at least there's userChrome.css, which I've already used to get rid of the rounded corners on my tabs.

I managed to fix the purple by changing the theme to a custom dark proton one, so there's that.

I'm a little weirded out that setting the flags in about:config didn't remove the rounded bits though. Not sure what that's about, but as long as FF doesn't kill support for userChrome.css I think I'll live.

Man, this looks like the kind of shit I'd love to see someone put in a progression fantasy series.

It feels like what would power the mechas in Gurren Lagann if it had a sequel series where they beat the heat death of the universe and kept going.

Complete handwavey shenaniganous nonsense, but fun to fit into the kind of custom-physics/magic systems present in the litrpg genre. If you're into that kind of fantasy, check out series like Cradle or any of the "cultivation"-oriented stuff mentioned on r/litrpg. (Some are much better than others, but there are a good number of books where the power level of stuff keeps growing until the character is seeing ancient civilizations build insanely ridiculous stuff that's on this scale just because)

In general if you are doing a major UI overhaul and the overwhelming feedback from more than 50% of your userbase is negative, it doesn't mean that you should double-down and continue development of a framework that locks you into something they hate. It means that you should step back and ensure that the changes you make don't alienate your userbase - because if you don't, they will leave.

Disabling nova doesn't seem to actually prevent all the purple though. Some is still leaking through T_T

Well, so there are basically two types of AI-using company here: The ones where they don't fire off devs in favor of forcing AI on their other developers, and the ones that do.

The former ones tend to be more conservative with their use of AI tooling - usually it's for code review (which is actually beneficial as a safety net when treated as a blocker rather than replacement for human review) or template test code generation (e.g. it's easy to make a feature, easy to define the tests, but annoying and time-consuming to implement the automation for the tests - but also easy to review generated tests to ensure that they match the definitions). These companies are basically treating AI as a way to try and ensure future revenue; they don't inherently know if it's actually going to help, but they think it's worth trying.

The latter ones push their remaining devs to use AI to pump out features faster than realistically possible...which means that they don't do adequate code review of the slop, the developers lose sight of how the stuff they've built actually works, nobody at the company knows how anything works, and eventually, the initial burst of customers onboarded for rapidly-created features dies out. The bugs start appearing, the token cost for fixing them (and adding more features) starts ballooning, and at that point, it doesn't even matter if you hire on new developers because they would have to reverse engineer the whole platform to fix it.

There are of course ones in the middle, but the further companies fall in the latter category, the harder they're going to fall.

But, yeah, I agree, this isn't really a good use of the subreddit but it is a hilarious graph.

Then when business ramps up where you need more people: they either pay crap wages for new people (so people don’t apply or you get low quality applicants)

Correction: In big tech, new hires will always get paid more, and people who have stayed around for a long time being good employees won't.

I've been in my role for 3.5 years now and my latest bonus was ~10k more per year. That sounds good initially...until you realize that someone filled into the role below mine (that I used to be in) and their starting pay is $40k above what I'm making now.

I'm pretty convinced it's AI. It's mostly the people standing around and looking exciting at something other than the sky, while others in the same crowd look bored and staring at nothing, but in a way that seems more like they're not in the same room with everyone else and instead just stock-generated.

Honestly though it's scarily good. There's some level of inconsistency between scenes, but overall object structure of the rocket is mostly consistent. I feel some aspects of the rocket's DESIGN don't make sense though (why do the nose cones fall off if that's not where the parachute is?) and I'm not seeing anyone in the thread here cite where this was done. It seems like the kind of thing that would at least be associated with a school's website post at the very minimum, and I would expect there to be other camera angles of the same moment, but there aren't any.

You can also make them with a bike pump, rubber cork, a few other hardware store-bought things, glue, balsa wood, and a soda bottle.

I never had one of these store-bought things but oh boy did I have fun with the home-made one that I made with my dad.

Yeah, it's been done a good number of times.

You cache the simulation results, apply the coloring to the balls at the end of it, then render the cached simulation with the selected colors.

God such a shame. Sure, you could only record at 960fps for like 1.2 seconds, but the whole point was to capture the teeensy tiny moment that is too fast for your own eyes.

I can interpolate a dog running at 30fps to see its silliness at higher framerate in my head. I cannot see its stretchy skin flapping and bouncing with every jump though, and neither can AI; the only way to actually capture it is to literally capture it with a camera, and to do that I have to use an 8-year-old phone for it -_-