• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 3rd, 2023

help-circle
  • If you have only one device on Wi-Fi, multiplexing turned off, or especially if you have MU-MIMO support, Wi-Fi can be faster than a single wired connection. It is still higher latency and subject to other drawbacks such as security and power consumption, but of course it offers advantages that can outweigh the disadvantages depending on use case and user needs.

    That said, it’s technically not faster than the cable, but rather faster at the data link or network layer. For example, CAT8 physically supports up to 40Gbps, but most consumer and even professional electronics only support up to 2.5Gbps. Only really enterprise level switches can push up to like 100Gbps onto copper, and even then that’s using QSFP transceivers, not RJ-45 connections. Fiber cables regularly push 400Gbps.


  • Kind of. With hoisting, the compiler/interpreter will find variable declarations and execute them before executing the rest of the code. Hoisting leaves the variables as undefined until the code assigning the value to the variable is executed. Hoisting does not initialize the variables.

    For example:

    console.log(foo);
    var foo;
    //Expected output: console logs ‘null’

    foo = ‘bar’;
    console.log(foo);
    var foo;
    //Expected output: console logs ‘bar’

    console.log(foo === undefined);
    var foo;
    //Expected output: console logs ‘true’

    This means you can essentially write your code with variable declarations at the end, but it will still be executed as though the declarations were at the beginning. Your initializations and value assignments will still be executed as normal.

    This is a feature that you should probably avoid because I honestly cannot think of any good use case for it that won’t end up causing confusion, but it is important to understand that every variable within your scope will be declared at the beginning of execution regardless of where it is written within your code.



  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, because you clearly need it. You dont even know what bad faith is. Bad faith arguing is when you aren’t actually working towards the resolution of the argument, but instead just making frivolous contradictions that you yourself probably dont even believe in, just to try and keep the other side from making a point. Insulting you is not bad faith. So, yeah, go back to school and actually pay attention this time.


  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In short, I am proposing that dissonance, that is, the existence of nonfitting relations among cognitions, is a motivating factor in it’s own right.

    Need that one more time? Here ya go

    In short, I am proposing that dissonance, that is, the existence of nonfitting relations among cognitions, is a motivating factor in it’s own right.

    Maybe if you read it ONE MORE TIME it will click for you

    In short, I am proposing that dissonance, that is, the existence of nonfitting relations among cognitions, is a motivating factor in it’s own right.

    Cognitive dissonance is the existence of nonfitting relations among cognition, not the feeling of discomfort arising from that. It is what you are suffering from right now. You have the evidence laid clearly in front of you, but you cherry pick one TINY tidbit and interpret it incorrectly so as to suit your needs. You KNOW you are wrong, and you are arguing in bad faith.



  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And I’m saying YOUR usage is the colloquial usage. Just look at the very source of the term, Leon Festinger’s “A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance” from 1957. here is a link

    Chapter 1, page 3.

    In short, I am proposing that dissonance, that is, the existence of nonfitting relations among cognitions, is a motivating factor in it’s own right. By the term cognition, here and in the remainder of the book, I mean any knowledge, opinion, or belief about the environment, about oneself, or about one’s behavior. Cognitive dissonance can be seen as an antecedent condition which leads to activity oriented toward dissonance reduction just as hunger leads to activity oriented toward hunger reduction.

    He makes it clear that cognitive dissonance is the status of holding incongruous beliefs, NOT the status of discomfort. He states that cognitive dissonance CAUSES discomfort, and that people tend to seek to resolve that discomfort, but cognitive dissonance is not the discomfort itself. It is “the existence of nonfitting relations among cognitions”.



  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Go back to grade school and learn reading comprehension again, please. Just because I said that colloquialisms are descriptive, does not mean that I said that all dictionary definitions are prescriptive. Get your red herring straw man bullshit out of here. You clearly lost the argument if you are at this point.





  • cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance /ˈkäɡnədiv ˈdisənəns/ noun PSYCHOLOGY the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change

    Nothing to do with a feeling of discomfort or reconciling the beliefs. Not sure where you got that idea from.


  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you accept that your goals cannot be accomplished, why maintain them as goals? If you know it is futile, why bother? It is literally a waste of time at that point.

    That said, I personally dont think it is futile. I think it mostly is an attainable goal, minus the withering of the state; I don’t think we could reach a point where the state is completely unnecessary, so I advocate Socialism. I just also think it is ridiculous that someone would try and claim something is futile while simultaneously advocating that everyone adhere to that thing. Their philosophy states clearly attainable, objective goals. If they think it is unrealistic for anyone to ever achieve those goals, then they don’t believe in their own philosophy. That is textbook cognitive dissonance.




  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlThe Lemmy experience
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, when you realize that most of the radical communists on here truly believe that there must be an eternal struggle working towards communism but never actually achieving the goal, it makes sense why they are the way they are.

    Literally had one of them tell me that is beyond unrealistic to expect any state to be able to even implement Socialism to any real degree. Of course, in Marxism a Socialist state must exist before withering away as Communism is fully realized, so they will literally admit that their philosophy is impossible to achieve.

    They fetishize the struggle; they don’t actually want progress, they want to complain.



  • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlwhat?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They do share a significant commonality, though; they are both interpreted languages, rather than compiled. Sure, you can compile them, but they are meant to be run interpreted so you can quickly and easily tweak and change things and not have to wait for compilation to see the results. In that regard they are very comparable.