How do typewriters eat?

oh boy, another article about CEOs saying what “AI” could maybe do in the future. i’ll put this one in the pile with all the others

this feature will be entirely optional until microsoft realizes nobody in their right mind would enable it

also from the article:

Even more concerning, attempts to uninstall it often fail due to its deep integration into Samsung’s One UI operating system.

Reports indicate the app reactivates automatically following software updates or factory resets, making it virtually unremovable for average users.

but i do agree that “virtually unremovable” and “unremovable” are two very different things. and im not even sure i would classify this as “virtually unremovable”

at least they have a source

i will be very curious to see how this company does in 6 months. they are probably destined to repeat klarna’s mistakes.

could you attach a picture of it? i want to be sure i don’t accidentally look at it by mistake

it adds to the metaphor

The commission pitched the Digital Omnibus as simplifying and streamlining digital regulations to relieve the regulatory burden for digital services and AI systems, with a specific focus on helping small-to medium-sized businesses in Europe; however, the draft proposal goes further than expected.

won’t somebody think of the poor “AI” companies? 😢

if OP is using gentoo then there is a very real chance they aren’t able to take screenshots yet.

back in my gentoo days it took a while to get that set up. although it wasn’t exactly a top priority

everything is simple once you know how to do it. i think a lot of the arch recommenders likely don’t realize how difficult some of these things can be the first time. it’s the same with any kind of specialized knowledge i think. it’s one of the reasons why teaching can be difficult. but the arch community has been super helpful in my experience

please don’t make me read another bjarne book. the last time i read one it made me want to stop programming

C++ is a bazooka that only fires when it’s pointed at your feet

it feels like monopolies have become so common and widespread that companies are starting to forget that sometimes you can lose customers after raising prices.

i gave up on gentoo when the updates started making my laptop so hot that i had to point my bedroom fan at it in college. i was thinking of doing LFS but by that point gentoo was turning into such a headache and i wanted something simpler. i switched to arch afterwards, but now i mainly just use macos and let tim handle all that stuff for me. although i’m tempted to try arch again when im done with grad school and have more time

mine as well. it was awful

i think the gentoo pacman looking guy is cool

computer science exams must have been so easy for you

i chose my first linux distro based on difficulty (gentoo). needless to say it took me two weeks to get my computer to boot up and load i3 without problems.

for anyone curious, here’s a “constructive” explanation of why a⁰ = 1. i’ll also include a “constructive” explanation of why rational exponents are defined the way they are.

anyways, the equality a⁰ = 1 is a consequence of the relation

a^m+1 = a^m • a.

to make things a bit simpler, let’s say a=2. then we want to make sense of the formula

2^m+1 = 2^m • 2

this makes a bit more sense when written out in words: it’s saying that if we multiply 2 by itself m+1 times, that’s the same as first multiplying 2 by itself m times, then multiplying that by 2. for example: 2³ = 2² • 2, since these are just two different ways of writing 2 • 2 • 2.

setting 2⁰ is then what we have to do for the formula to make sense when m = 0. this is because the formula becomes

2⁰⁺¹ = 2⁰ • 2¹.

because 2⁰⁺¹ = 2 and 2¹ = 2, we can divide both sides by 2 and get 1 = 2⁰.

fractional exponents are admittedly more complicated, but here’s a (more handwavey) explanation of them. they’re basically a result of the formula

(a^m)ⁿ = a^m•n

which is true when m and n are whole numbers. it’s a bit more difficult to give a proper explanation as to why the above formula is true, but maybe an example would be more helpful anyways. if m=2 and n=3, it’s basically saying

(a²)³ = (a • a)³ = (a • a) • (a • a) • (a • a) = a^2•3.

it’s worth noting that the general case (when m and n are any whole numbers) can be treated in the same way, it’s just that the notation becomes clunkier and less transparent.

anyways, we want to define fractional exponents so that the formula

(a^r)^s = a^r • a^s

is true when r and s are fractional numbers. we can start out by defining the “simple” fractional exponents of the form a^1/n, where n is a whole number. since n/n = 1, we’re then forced to define a^1/n so that

a = a^1/n•n = (a^1/n)ⁿ.

what does this mean? let’s consider n = 2. then we have to define a^1/2 so that (a^1/2)² = a. this means that a^1/2 is the square root of a. similarly, this means that a^1/n is the n-th root of a.

how do we use this to define arbitrary fractional exponents? we again do it with the formula in mind! we can then just define

a^m/n = (a^1/n)^m.

the expression a^1/n makes sense because we’ve already defined it, and the expression (a^1/n)^m makes sense because we’ve already defined what it means to take exponents by whole numbers. in words, this means that a^m/n is the n-th square root of a, multiplied by itself m times.

i think this kind of explanation can be helpful because they show why exponents are defined in certain ways: we’re really just defining fractional exponents so that they behave the same way as whole number exponents. this makes it easier to remember the definitions, and it also makes it easier to work with them since you can in practice treat them in the “same way” you treat whole number exponents.