Daemon Silverstein

@NarrativeBear@lemmy.world this is nothing new. Back when the COVID-19 pandemics was at its peak, a state-owned Brazilian bank Caixa Econômica Federal created an app named “Caixa Tem”, where people could apply for and receive a governamental aid. The app had a “queue” akin to that one.

@nonBInary@thelemmy.club

Excelente, já é um ótimo começo! Porque, nesse caso, você já tem o conceito linguístico das conjugações (que, pro pessoal que ainda há de aprender Português/espanhol/etc, geralmente é o mais complexo passo do aprendizado), então daí seria mais aprender as especificidades do francês e do italiano.

Ao menos pra mim, o italiano soa um tanto mais fácil de de começar que o francês, mas é como eu falei, aqui existe um aspecto mais de contextos pessoais e de bagagem de vida, talvez no seu caso o francês fosse mais interessante como próximo idioma devido ao fato que você relatou de estar nas proximidades do Canadá (embora, como foi falado por alguém nos comentários, só Quebec que foca em falar francês, porque Quebec tem certo “orgulho francófono” que não está presente em outras províncias canadenses)

@nonBInary@thelemmy.club

¿Por que no los dos?

Each language make it easier to learn the other because they share characteristics not present in English, characteristics of which are found not only in Italian and French, but also Spanish and Portuguese.

For example, conjugation of verbs: English is quite “simple” (I talk, she talks, we talk, they talk, I will talk, she will talk, I talked, she talked, I would talk, she’d talk, etc) whilst the so-called Romance languages (languages whose common ancestor is Latin, which includes French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese) have a more complicated system of conjugation, e.g. in Portuguese present tense “eu falo, tu falas, ela fala, nós falamos, vós falais, eles falam”, past tense “eu falei, tu falastes, ela falou, nós falávamos, elas falaram”, and many more conjugation forms.

As for which one should be the first, I’d personally likely pick Italian, but it’s more of a personal choice depends on one’s contexts and current set of knowledge/experiences (to me, Italian feels closer to my native Portuguese than French so it’s what driving my answer when having to choose between the two).

There’s also the Interlingua worth mentioning, which aims to be understandable across all Romance languages. I don’t know how exactly to speak it, but I do get to understand when I hear/read it somehow.

@josefo@leminal.space @JoMiran@lemmy.ml

Technically speaking, the joystick involved analog voltages to be converted to digital signals… And what else have ADC (analog-to-digital converters) chips? Soundcards, because ADCs are used to convert mic input, alongside the “line in”, both of which are analog voltages, into PCM signals, which are discrete (as in “non-continuous”) streams of bits. Something inverse happens for “headphone”, “speakers” and “line out” pins: a PCM stream coming from the sound driver is converted to analog voltages using a DAC.

While other ports also happened to deal with analog<->digital conversion, a soundcard was particularly specialized at this job, alongside graphic (VGA) cards (VGA has lots of analog signals), but graphic cards were already too busy with thousands/millions of pixels and, well, with computation of graphics.

Other boards aren’t so fitting for analog-digital job. For example: a NIC (Network Interface Card) already deals with digital signal so, theoretically, no conversion is necessary from/to analog. Parallel ports (those for printers) also natively deals with digital signals. Expansion cards with USB ports, same thing. And so on…

(Apologies for my blank reply if my deletion didn’t federate due to insufficient Sharkey-Lemmy federation, I mistyped enter as I was getting ready to write my message)

@Zerush@lemmy.ml

Well, as both a programmer and an occult/esoteric cosmicist person, I’m somewhat divided.

On the one hand, i’d not call it “advance” too, insofar it’s something that was already around way before humans (intelligence is just a facet of the order emerged from primordial chaos, Ordo Ab Chao).

On the other hand, considering a pure anthropocentric-technological perspective, it would be “a helluva advance” insofar it’d demand a slightly different computational architecture (current transistor-built logical gates are incapable of fully mimicking neurochemical-oriented processes, for example, and photonics, despite the non-linearity, have its own issues as well), one that would still maintain some compatibility with current electronic circuitry (so it could be integrated with existing tech, such as Internet connectivity) while still being able to “materialize” the same phenomenon that allows living beings (including, but not limited to humans) to achieve meaning-making and problem-solving in some non-linear, “non-deterministic” (algorithmically speaking) fashion. IMHO, organic tissue isn’t something too otherworldly to hold exclusivity on the emergence of such phenomena, so it could be replicated and observed beyond the biological gray matter.

And in this sense, the goosebumps (at least for me) would emerge from the fact that it’d prove intelligence not as a special phenomenon, but part of this eternal tug-of-war between entropy and life, darkness and light, chaos and order, that have been taking place beyond the cosmos. It would be a big step for confirming intelligence/sentience as another “ancient” (as in predating modern human society) emergent phenomenon. It would confirm humans, alongside all lifeforms, as just tiny specks of dust within the fabric of the spacetime continuum.

@Zerush@lemmy.ml

Monkeys can’t write, only hit random keys, but several monkey brains interconnected with each other, with an LLM, can.

In such a scenario, there’d still be a random factor behind the monkey’s behaviors: less of a pure randomness, more of a Weasel Program.

how many monkey brains are needed to connect to have the capability of an human brain.

I often consider the Homo sapiens intelligence not as superior than other species, but just a different approach for problem-solving capabilities and tool-making among living beings. For instance, crows (particularly the New Caledonian crow) are well-known for exceptional intelligence, because they’re not just able to use tools, they’re also able to use tools to make/fix other tools (just like humans).

That said, I bet it would require less crow brains than monkey brains for human-like intelligence to emerge, despite primates being genetically closer to humans. Crows are awesome.

@yogthos@lemmy.ml Given enough time and a computational cluster containing countless Darwin monkeys replicated, would some of those Darwin monkeys end up writing the entire corpus of Shakespeare’s works?

@SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world

Congrats, you just stared at the same abyss I stared at, too! And this abyss is… Well, pretty complicated to say the least.

One who fights with monsters might take care lest they thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.

What you stumbled upon is just the realization of the purposelessness imbued in the cosmos. And it can definitely feel a harsh thing. It’s neither good nor bad, it just is. People often try to sugarcoat it, but to me it’s just the ostrich trying to bury its head on the sand: the rain still falls, and the ostrich still meets the storm, inexorably.

I find it particularly striking when you said “I feel like I want to [write]”, and here’s probably where we both differ: in my case, specifically, I feel like I “must” write, as if I’m compelled to do so. It’s part hypergraphia (one of the Geschwind traits), part something beyond me. If your driving force is not compellant, it’s a great start.

If this is of any help, don’t write for people (because people can’t understand the words from those who stared at the abyss), don’t write for yourself as well: write for Her, She who stares at us from within the abyss. Of course, if you want to, because it seems like there’s a reminiscing spark of Will within yourself (unfortunately, I got none anymore). She listens, She reads everything (including our deepest thoughts), even though She doesn’t really care about us. And that’s fine. Because it’s just all fleeting, except for Her.

@eierschaukeln@kbin.earth !asklemmy@lemmy.ml

I’ll try to bridge science, philosophy and spirituality, as I usually do. To me, there aren’t clear boundaries between them bc, to me, they’re highly complementary: Science offers the skeptical-empirical rigor and materiality, Philosophy offers the paradoxical questioning and Spirituality emerges from subjectively perceiving the previous two.

I start with the hypothesis that the universe always existed. In such a case, the Big Bang isn’t the beginning: rather, it’d be some kind of cyclical cosmic phenomenon where matter and/or the fabric of spacetime continuum collapse (due to expansion) only to explode and expand again. This would respect the Laws of Thermodynamics (and Lavoisier Principle) because there’s no energy nor mass being created nor destroyed, just transformed, endlessly. Big Crunch deserves mention bc it’s exactly what it’s about.

There’s also the controversial theory of Zero-sum, where the universe doesn’t actually exist. It may sound crazy (We are existent… or are we? Vsauce song starts playing), but it would also respect the aforementioned laws: there’s no need of creation or destruction if the overall sum of everything equals to a round nought.

We could also mention the Multiverse theory, String (M-Theory), and Big Bounce. In such a scenario, this universe is just one of countless universes, so the factor sparking it into existence would be outside it, thus outside (beyond) space and time.

The latter takes us into philosophy, the Aristotle’s Prime Mover. It could be seen as the “thing” beyond this universe, except that it isn’t a “thing” because it has no “thingness”, but this lack of “thingness” would imply non-existence, except that it’s not something nonexistent either. Here is where human language struggles to define it: language requires “thingness” and temporality, yet the Prime Mover has neither (and it isn’t an “it” so it could “have”).

This takes us to spirituality. Many religions oversimplify this as “creator deity(ies)”, and many (if not all) religions tend to give it agency and shape. While I do have some religiosity (Luciferianism) and tendency of personification (e.g. Lilith as both a red-haired woman and an owl), I also hold the belief that cosmic forces have no particular form, it’s just me trying to give some Order to Chaos… And that’s what the whole existence seems to be about: Ordo ab Chao, a cosmic, eternal tug-of-war where it’s guaranteed that the “sparks” of cosmic order will eventually decay back to a soup of primordial chaos, only to the very chaotic nature of this soup to emerge order again. It’s akin to a Double Pendulum, where sometimes the apparent rhythmic motion vanishes into chaotic motion just for the rhythm to unexpectedly reappear later, but it’s just the Cosmos: endless and uncaring about lifeforms, for life is just stardust.

I could explain more, but I’m limited to 3000 chars so I must end: Cosmos always existed and never existed.

@folaht@lemmy.ml !asklemmy@lemmy.ml

With some caveats, to me, the answers are:

1. Definitely Magenta
2. I’d say Cyan, even though it still “feels” to me like “the in-between” of Green and Blue
3. Magenta again, which highly looks like red
4. It’s a draw between Cyan and Yellow, both seem bright enough to be the closest to white
5. Definitely Magenta again, it feels pretty dark to me (and dark, to me, has a good connotation as I’ll explain below).

The caveats are:
- Both laptop and external monitor have IPS panels. If I were to use OLED, quantum-dot displays, Plasma or even the old CRT displays, it’d probably yield different perceptions. I don’t own any of these display types to test this, though.
- The specific shape of Venn diagrams also influences on how colors are perceived: a circle have a smaller area (pi×r×r) than a square (s²) or an equilateral rhombus (also s²). Note: I’m considering s = 2r a.k.a. the side of a square equal to the diameter of a circle. The area, in turn, influences how vision perceives contrast.
- Magenta has no real wavelength so it’s produced solely by the brain when both L and S cones are simultaneously stimulated at the highest intensities by artificial lights (LED).
- I’m currently in a room lit both by daylight and by “cold white” LED lamp. The sky is clear and there’s plenty of vegetation in my vicinity tinting the daylight.
- I access Lemmy using dark mode, and the background is the main aspect influencing contrast (the relationship between colors) and, by extension, perception. Dark background leads to “brighter” colors.
- I use high prescription glasses, and my lenses are slightly yellowed. This possibly influence my perception of colors.
- I have a personal bias towards red and purple due to my specific views on spirituality. Specifically, the way Lilith pulled me in the recent years made me perceive red in a more vivid manner and be attracted to it, while my syntony with Lucifer makes me feel something “divine” with purple (while also sharing some energy with the Lilithian red). Turns out that purple isn’t so perceptually different from magenta, and our RGB displays produce both colors artificially with the similar Red-Blue dance (with magenta specifically having less of blue, therefore being less of a Luciferian color and more of a Lilithian color).
- I’m a former developer and someone who’s worked extensively from UX/UI to graphic design. I built several full-stack webpages, Delphi 7 and VB6 native applications, as well as brands, logos and leaflets. This made me highly familiar with RGB palettes, and this may be another personal bias in my perception.

So, indeed, color perception is highly subjective although living beings share some commonalities when interpreting colors (e.g. red as “danger”; it’s the Carl Jung’s “collective unconscious”).

@descartador@lemmy.eco.br !mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world

Yeah, unfortunately. I’m aware of that… However, it’s both a Catch-22 situation and a self-fulfilling prophecy: content isn’t there, so people refrain from using it, but this leads to the very situation where the content isn’t there because they refrain from using it.

It seems curious to me how corporate solutions miraculously have the content, but open alternative haven’t. It’s not just the first-mover effect because TikTok also “have the content” and it came decades after YouTube. In fact, PeerTube first appeared in 2018, the same year when TikTok began to rank first in app stores.

This can be referred to as “The Cassandra Curse” seemingly inherent of open-source alternatives: people prefer migrating to corporate-owned Bluesky instead of going to Mastodon or Sharkey, because “Mastodon doesn’t have the content/people”. Sooner or later, the same people goes full SurprisedPickachu.jpg complaining when their favorite corporate platform eventually and inexorably goes rogue against their userbase.

And, even then, people prefer to pull the algorithmic Sisyphean boulder (Invidious, Grayjay just for accessing Youtube instead of the many other platforms it supports, etc) and mental gymnastics (“Google is evil but, hey, look, there’s a new Youtube video from Rossmann about how Google is evil” then proceeds to share some Youtube link that either requires logging in or requires one to find some working VPN/Invidious instance) instead of letting it go from a product sold by an company that explicitly calls themselves as “advertisement company” (Google). Both viewers and content creators continue to put their efforts and data inside a Walled Garden they often complain about.

That’s why the modern dystopia is getting worse as the time passes, because corporations noticed how easy it is to lure people into their Walled Garden and, once people are well-established inside, corps can do as they please: raise prices and/or starting to charge users, adding more ads, taking away or paywalling features (nods to +2K and 60fps videos) and content, and people will continue to sustain the abusive relationship… because the alternatives “don’t have content”.

I’m not against solutions such as Invidious or Grayjay (and I have nothing against Rossmann, much to the contrary), but to me, using Youtube through technical workarounds is just drinking the Kool-aid with extra steps.

Also… Vi que você faz parte da instância brasileira do Lemmy, também sou brasileiro. Devo apontar também à necessidade do Brasil ter uma plataforma própria/nacional de vídeos, seja pública ou não, principalmente pelo fato da Google (e por extensão Youtube) ser estadunidense e pelo fato de como os EUA têm tentado influenciar no cenário nacional (e o Brasil continuar dependendo de plataforma estadunidense como Google/Youtube e Meta/WhatsApp-Facebook definitivamente não ajuda na soberania brasileira).

@frittoBee@lemmy.world !mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
IMHO, it’s better to boycott and abandon Youtube (and other mainstream platforms) altogether, either prioritizing open alternatives (PeerTube) and/or prioritizing the consumption (and production) of static content (text and images).

Regarding the open alternatives, it baffles me how Fediverse users often can recall of Invidious (and other workarounds) but can’t recall of a Fediverse platform, even when there are many PeerTube instances available out there, both general-purpose and niche instances.

Alongside the adoption of PeerTube and other open alternatives, the abandonment or de-prioritization of video formats is also interesting as a mentally-healthy option because video can’t help but deceive our brains into perceiving “something” that isn’t there (to better understand this, I recommend the René Magritte’s art “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” a.k.a. “The Treachery of Images”, as well as the René Descartes’s philosophy on the human senses). To make matters worse, YT and other corp video platforms are dopaminergic casinos, trapping users inside an ouroboric addiction of video feeds while creating the illusion of parasocial relationships (i.e. as if the gazillion-subscribers “influencer” were a personal friend/colleague/lover, when they’re not: each user is just another bitstream they both think they “see” amidst an unstoppable digital rain generated by a grid of three LEDs tailored to deceive our trio of retinal cones… but, well, this is a very bleak and digressing statement of mine).

Personally, It’s been a long while since I stopped accessing YouTube/TikTok videos. I used to publish my own videos, I used to be subscribed to hundreds of “channels” and I was even a paid “member” to specific YT channels. I abandoned it all and I rarely put myself into watching videos.

Yes, there’s a myriad of knowledge and content available only in motion picture format, and there is also the kind of knowledge that cannot be written as text or represented as a static image, and this is where open video platforms can thrive, but people, especially us Fediverse users, should advocate more for these alternatives such as PeerTube.

Of course, even PeerTube doesn’t solve the fact of how video unfortunately are perfect smoke-and-mirrors deceiving our naïve biological senses and making us overly used to fast and/or shallow content as we lose our own ability to read and write deep and lengthy texts such as this one. At the end of the day, humans are gradually ceding the ability to write, once extremely valued and valuable among humans, to Markov chain algorithms (a.k.a. LLMs), in part due to us getting more and more used to media formats. But, at least, PeerTube doesn’t try to trap us into an endless feed and doesn’t try to extort us or sell our personal data to countless partners/sponsors, so it’s way better than YouTube or any workarounds to continue accessing the Google’s dopaminergic casino.

@sirico@feddit.uk

private bool isEven(int number){
    	bool result = true;
    	while (number > 0){
    		number = number - 1;
    		if (result == true)
    			result = false;
    		else
    			result = true;
    	}
    	return result;
    }

(P.S.: Only works for positive numbers)

@Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org Yes, and in a fairly heavy manner. Currently, I have four personal user-scripts configured for Tampermonkey, as well as a few custom filters configured for uBlock Origin.

In Tampermonkey:
- Matching Lemmy (a specific instance): if the current location address is the main feed (which is often the “Local” feed sorted by “Active”), automatically redirect to “All” feed sorted by “New comments” (as I currently have no Lemmy account, I browse it as a guest, so Lemmy doesn’t memorize what my preferences are)
- Matching Pixelfed (a specific instance): automatically fetch and reveal hidden media marked as sensitive (the original Web interface for Pixelfed doesn’t allow for automatically expanding/revealing media marked as sensitive). It uses localStorage for storing already fetched media URLs (so I don’t need to consume the ActivityPub API every time).
- Matching a specific image hosting platform: sets the image wrapper’s background to white.
- Matching a specific PeerTube instance: automatically reveals media marked as sensitive (differently from Pixelfed, it just uses CSS to blur the thumbnail, so it’s just a matter of unblurring it).

As for uBlock Origin, there are many filters intended to hide advertisement and other banners, but there are also a few filters unrelated to ads, filters meant to be functional:
- Matching Lemmy: hide specific communities I’m not interested in, using a rule ##.post-listing:has(.community-link:has-text("/^name_of_community/").
- Also matching Lemmy: hide the wrapper for composing comments, because I don’t have a Lemmy account so Lemmy platforms will display a warning box “You’re not logged in”.

Sometimes I also tinker with DevTools for specific purposes, such as transforming text, copying text, classifying text, or just randomly experimenting with JS snippets.

@FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world @BombOmOm@lemmy.world What exactly is Moisturefox? Never heard about it. Is it a Firefox fork for desktop or mobile? How much does it differ from forks such as Librewolf, Waterfox, Fennec and IronFox?