You can use some form of real extensions, e.g. the extended real line (+inf, -inf is often useful for programmers) or the projectively extended real line (+inf = -inf).
This is not about infinity in math not being a _specific_ value, it can certainly be (the actual infinite instead of potential).
It's simply about design and foresight, in my humble opinion.
I was fascinated when I first learned of [FreeBSD Jails], I wonder if right before containerization became a thing the concept was developed further for its requirements (could it have been?) it would have offered a more efficient containerization platform.
Jails are entirely different conceptually from UML; they share the host kernel and are roughly analogous to containers/namespaces. UML is an entirely separate kernel, running as user mode process.
I had a hard time trying to parse something understandable from the article.
This is what I got from it (I'd be happy to hear someone informed correcting me/confirming). (excerpt from a discussion yesterday I had with some friends not too math inclined)
What it seems to be the articles claim is that, you could define a scaling operation in the angles you performed, finding some constant scaling factor (say alpha) and running the operation twice to reach the identity (rotation 0 compared to baseline), e.g.:
I = R ⊕ (α.R ⊕ α.R)
In their example that would be something like (with alpha=0.3):
The interlocutor on the other end experiencing time (or reasoning) at a different scale is an interesting case too, imagine a week feeling like centuries to them.
I really have a hard time understanding this train of thought.
One could say these sentences are also a product of "its culture".
The world is not black or white, good or evil. Things are more nuanced and complicated than advertised to be.
I'm not the single source of truth either, but I think there are lots of resources for people interested in avoiding propaganda and trying to understand things more deeply.
Maybe, but at least I believe there's plenty historical evidence for a different interpretation than: "russia and china big bad, their values are wrong/not aligned with the west"
I can't speak for China, but when it comes to Russia, take it from a citizen: yes, it is that bad, and the reason is that it's an empire that can't stop being an empire without falling apart (much like Ottoman Empire -> Turkey did).
While I am all for making conscious choices on what to support I can't take anything phrased like that seriously "all is contributors".
Hyprland, while inferior (imo) in some aspects to sway on the wayland tiling manager landscape is a fine piece of software that I use on my non-work computer (I still use sway for stability).
Back on the topic: I reiterate I'd be happy to avoid using or supporting projects based on non-purely technical issues (discussion on "pure technicality" omitted for brevity).
It's just... What, do I need to know every persons imo completely irrelevant opinions on whatever du jour hot political topic? Maybe the answer could be yes,
I would be fine with dropping Hyprland support, maybe I will after digging a bit more. But this whole thing just reeks to me of terminally informed and ragebaited people looking for a platform to vomit their completely irrelevant opinions, actions speak more (e.g. fostering a dangerous environment _adjacent to the project_ based on discrimination).
I just feel I want to nope out of this industry and everything related to it, it's very overwhelming.
> What, do I need to know every persons imo completely irrelevant opinions on whatever du jour hot political topic?
No. But if they're using their social capital they've built via their software contributions (like DHH) to spread racist nonsense, then maybe it's worth considering alternatives, or at the very least, stop supporting those projects.
Sure, but I think there's a spectrum when making that decision:
"should keep their bullshit to themselves" <---> "should perhaps take leadership and avoid having their public channel a cesspool" <---> "actively encourages/participates in discriminatory practices" <---> "raging maniac hurting people, rallying for X"
Specifically on the topic of RubyGems:
I couldn't care less about what DHH posts or not, I certainly care that he uses his position to influence a chain of actors to interfere with something that always worked just because X.
I couldn't care less about the other side on the "cancel" mission, I care about influencing a chain of actors to interfere with something that always worked just because Y.
Please quarantine your political polarization/culture wars bullshit, non-anglo countries don't need it.
Working with Phoenix, and even more so Elixir and OTP, has been a great joy at a similar to almost the same level I had when transitioning from DotNet to Ruby in 2010 for my experience.
There are still some rough edges, and the job market might be more challenging, but overall I feel anything Elixir related at the moment provides for a high quality filter - both in terms of job opportunities and teams as well as the general product development experience.
I have been pretty happy with Elixir - the syntax takes getting used to, but I'm usually impressed by its elegance.
Phoenix I'm mixed on - it has a few things that "just work" and I'm happy about, but being an opinionated framework I find myself bumping into those opinions the more I want to do things my own way. Usually there's an escape hatch, but being new to both Elixir and Phoenix it's not always obvious to me how to do things when the happy path fails.
Maybe when google actually did searches. A coworker today was unable to find a very straightforward quoted text on google, on duckduckgo the first few hits were exactly what we were looking for.
As someone who wasn't able to get a lot of value from LLMs attempting to bruteforce their usage in my work environment I decided to experiment on a side project.
I document my whole experience and provide a few conclusions from my perspective.
Happy to hear some feedback, here or on the gist itself, let me know your thoughts!
This is not about infinity in math not being a _specific_ value, it can certainly be (the actual infinite instead of potential).
It's simply about design and foresight, in my humble opinion.
reply