3 ms·

Haha makes me think what would be the equiv in English. (And thanks for the pics!) My mention of Camus is not a endorsement of his ideas, more in comparison of

Haha makes me think what would be the equiv in English. (And thanks for the pics!) My mention of Camus is not a endorsement of his ideas, more in comparison of his character(/effectiveness wrt various psychological archetypes) vs Sartre . You might also try to formalize (and understand how formalization can fail): Ein Teil von jener Kraft, die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft (Which makes vinnyvichy (the character!!) aspire, in terms of nominative determinism, to work to be Cap's counterpart XD) (I posit that Cap is Stan Lee's fave son, rei publicae*) I have a better, but not yet complete of course grip on my firmware, (more contrapositives to "the road to hell is paved..") See the jseliger's goodbye, I am fairly certain that HN has too many well-intentioned bullies * Loki for Revisionistas, this is why my effort to uncover the Finnic-baltic-ugric (?) origins of proto-Prometheus **Goethe remains to be Repsilonvisioned, eg s/evil/naughtiness/ ala Cantor

vinnyvichy 2y ago
The reconstructed ugric myth would involve a proto-sigurd inadvertently poisoning a shaman with his own (herbal? fleurie?) medicine Have to include PG and dang (and the workfromhome who has delete privilegs) amongst the bullies, most unfortunately.. If you are paying I plead for you to listen to your own injunctions to be more thoughtful.. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41167419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41167419 *You must understand that Camus is suspected (by me) of having latent schizotypy, therefore please forgive his hamfisted approach to promoting absurdity.
082349872349872 2y ago
Regarding firmware issues: while it may be fun* and educational to build a forth from the ROM monitor (flashing it in if there isn't one already there) and do as much as possible self-hosted, it's often quicker and easier to bite the bullet and cross-develop. * for some values of "fun": I have memories of using an oscope to debug what problem in printf(3) was causing my print debugging to be buggy. That was type II fun.
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  I agree in principle,and, from experience, even.. but "we"* tend to trust (the characters like) gvicino more :)( There needs to be that epsilon of absurd distrust as well.. as an actual, physical, liminal raum, aka the no-man's land of truth or truce,aka the meatspace of quasi-community. *You and I (our "real" selves), but a direct sum?
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  t ⊆ K, where E(K. G(K `will` evil → K `does` good)) (if we wish to fully determine yon Kraft we'll need to minimize or maximize)
  - vinnyvichy 2y ago
    Is this the strongest you can manage :)? Okay my bad at innuendoing the context/env/extra quantifiers, but I think you get what I'm driving at (even if I don't, not really?) But I guess this here is great starting point for collaborative firmware debugging.
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      stronger would be E(K. G(K `will` evil) ∧ G(K `does` good)), which I —being weak at temporal logic— think equivales E(K. G(K `will` evil ∧ K `does` good)). Note also that for the eternal we'd want a sort of G' that holds in the past as well as the future? EDIT: also, I think G (JWvG, not "not F not") is using schaffen in the sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_unregelmäßig https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_unregelmäßig , but it is amusing to think of it in the ugs. sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_regelmäßig https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_regelmäßig , where Woland is constrained by the ergodic incompressible nature of the "good" to schlep his portion of it from place to place*, no matter what he will. * compare BAWR's "what is work? Work is of two kinds..."
      - vinnyvichy 2y ago
        Usually the most humorous sense correlates with the "optimal" one, but here my bet is with Goethe's usage.. you probably realized that I was using the jseliger goodbye threads to set an example. We can probably try to analyze the efficacy of my actions in the future, or at least improve the tactics.. [Tried to play the sovereign while the cats (mods) were away (or, narcissistically, "deciding on the exception" -- as in Carl Schmitt's cliche)] ...looks like I "succeeded", whatever that means (improve odds for rna cancer vaccines to become Grothendieck's dream? Manifested a study of mischievous tactics? But once we conceive of the good --while engaging in bad faith tactics -- the scheme fails??) [OTOH I got paid 0 points net, so does that mean I moved neutrinos in the Russell dichotomy] Granted, "we" need to work on our temporal logic.. But I do see an interesting mod, in E(K. G(K `will` mischief in the past) ∧ G(K `manage` good in the future)), Like you (I) maybe intended to mean, how much mischief, in what sign and proportion in relation to ___? Or should we go with E(K. G(K `use` bad faith tactics in the past ) ∧ G(K `do` a modicum of good in the future)), Or quantum voodoo. the wavefunction has support almost only in the bad faith subspace, but somehow collapses only in the "good". This almost works because bad faith -> good might involve "just" a "relativistic" frameshift

vinnyvichy 2y ago

The reconstructed ugric myth would involve a proto-sigurd inadvertently poisoning a shaman with his own (herbal? fleurie?) medicine Have to include PG and dang (and the workfromhome who has delete privilegs) amongst the bullies, most unfortunately.. If you are paying I plead for you to listen to your own injunctions to be more thoughtful.. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41167419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41167419 *You must understand that Camus is suspected (by me) of having latent schizotypy, therefore please forgive his hamfisted approach to promoting absurdity.

082349872349872 2y ago

Regarding firmware issues: while it may be fun* and educational to build a forth from the ROM monitor (flashing it in if there isn't one already there) and do as much as possible self-hosted, it's often quicker and easier to bite the bullet and cross-develop. * for some values of "fun": I have memories of using an oscope to debug what problem in printf(3) was causing my print debugging to be buggy. That was type II fun.

vinnyvichy 2y ago
I agree in principle,and, from experience, even.. but "we"* tend to trust (the characters like) gvicino more :)( There needs to be that epsilon of absurd distrust as well.. as an actual, physical, liminal raum, aka the no-man's land of truth or truce,aka the meatspace of quasi-community. *You and I (our "real" selves), but a direct sum?
082349872349872 2y ago
t ⊆ K, where E(K. G(K `will` evil → K `does` good)) (if we wish to fully determine yon Kraft we'll need to minimize or maximize)
- vinnyvichy 2y ago
  Is this the strongest you can manage :)? Okay my bad at innuendoing the context/env/extra quantifiers, but I think you get what I'm driving at (even if I don't, not really?) But I guess this here is great starting point for collaborative firmware debugging.
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    stronger would be E(K. G(K `will` evil) ∧ G(K `does` good)), which I —being weak at temporal logic— think equivales E(K. G(K `will` evil ∧ K `does` good)). Note also that for the eternal we'd want a sort of G' that holds in the past as well as the future? EDIT: also, I think G (JWvG, not "not F not") is using schaffen in the sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_unregelmäßig https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_unregelmäßig , but it is amusing to think of it in the ugs. sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_regelmäßig https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_regelmäßig , where Woland is constrained by the ergodic incompressible nature of the "good" to schlep his portion of it from place to place*, no matter what he will. * compare BAWR's "what is work? Work is of two kinds..."
    - vinnyvichy 2y ago
      Usually the most humorous sense correlates with the "optimal" one, but here my bet is with Goethe's usage.. you probably realized that I was using the jseliger goodbye threads to set an example. We can probably try to analyze the efficacy of my actions in the future, or at least improve the tactics.. [Tried to play the sovereign while the cats (mods) were away (or, narcissistically, "deciding on the exception" -- as in Carl Schmitt's cliche)] ...looks like I "succeeded", whatever that means (improve odds for rna cancer vaccines to become Grothendieck's dream? Manifested a study of mischievous tactics? But once we conceive of the good --while engaging in bad faith tactics -- the scheme fails??) [OTOH I got paid 0 points net, so does that mean I moved neutrinos in the Russell dichotomy] Granted, "we" need to work on our temporal logic.. But I do see an interesting mod, in E(K. G(K `will` mischief in the past) ∧ G(K `manage` good in the future)), Like you (I) maybe intended to mean, how much mischief, in what sign and proportion in relation to ___? Or should we go with E(K. G(K `use` bad faith tactics in the past ) ∧ G(K `do` a modicum of good in the future)), Or quantum voodoo. the wavefunction has support almost only in the bad faith subspace, but somehow collapses only in the "good". This almost works because bad faith -> good might involve "just" a "relativistic" frameshift