turtledragonfly

10 ms·

61.
by turtledragonfly 2y ago
EDIT aha, the program already supports exporting to a mesh via marching cubes; see the youtube video on the site. I hadn't realized that (: ---- Be aware that since it fundamentally works with SDFs, it is a somewhat different modelin
62.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Don't forget luck! I don't mean that in a dismissive sense — hard work is obviously very important. But more in the sense that if you're talented and hard working and aren't successful, it's not necessarily becaus
63.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Not the person you asked, but this sort of thing is pretty easy with templating languages, such as Perl's Template::Toolkit[1] or Python's Jinja2[2]. The advantage of a system like that over a plain programming language (such as L
64.
Neats and Scruffies(en.wikipedia.org)
1 points by turtledragonfly 3y ago|0 comments
65.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I think I see what you're saying. Perhaps my mention of Newton's third law gave you the impression that I was advocating for that "stone skip" theory — I assure you I wasn't! Especially as presented on that page, i
66.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I'm curious to know your reasoning more. Certainly if we flew the plane very low over the ground, the air pretty directly pushes down on it, and the hypothetical scale would register something. Just look at the grass when a helicopter
67.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
For people interested in this topic, here's a good set of slides going over Grassman/Clifford/Geometric algebra concepts: http://www.terathon.com/gdc12_lengyel.pdf And another good site: https://ma
68.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I think what they were saying is that from a pure "Newton's 3rd law" standpoint, if the plane has an upwards force, then the air has a corresponding downward force, which must go somewhere. Yes, it is spread out and complicat
69.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
> this duck is literally just paddling air with his wings Grossly speaking, sure. But I feel like this simplifies away a lot of the interesting bits. It's not as simple as, say, someone on a canoe paddling. Why is the duck's wi
70.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Not really a full answer for you, but one thing that this page clarified for me: I had generally previously thought of viscosity as "how slow" a fluid is. High viscosity means high "thickness," which means it flows slowl
71.
A community site for publishing poems, journals, logs, and lists(special.fish)
3 points by turtledragonfly 3y ago|1 comments
72.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Quality is all over the map, but I like weird little mishmash sites like this.
73.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Just piggybacking here to mention a variety of other "interpret structured binary data" tools. Apparently I collect links to these (: * fq - like jq for binary data: https://github.com/wader/fq * Kaitai Struc
74.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
> Photoshop ... Consumers have voted with their wallets on #2. Did they? Or did Adobe just stop offering #1, forcing customers into #2 whether they like it or not? I'm partly being facetious, but it's also partly a genuine ques
75.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I liked this article, because (1) it's well-written and detailed, and (2) I somehow disagree with it in my gut, though I'm not sure precisely why. So, it makes me think — another plus. I suppose the thing that bothers me is the ge
76.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
You can see a list of them, in chronological order, from the main site — click 'latest animations'[1] [1] https://bleuje.com/animationsite/2023_1/
77.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Not the person you asked, but here's a video you might like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNidsMesxSE&t=268s In that example, they do the character's physics first (just a ball), then match the animation to
78.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Apropos of nothing, I had a not-great experience switching from an oil furnace to heat pump. Maybe somebody else going through research will benefit from my woes. Some day I'll make a blog post for it: 1. Noise levels (inside) * Fundam
79.
Murphy's Law and Its Progeny(zira.home.xs4all.nl)
16 points by turtledragonfly 3y ago|4 comments
80.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I don't think the article proves that. I think these policies can be a bit of a McNamara fallacy[1]. When things go wrong, the benefits of aggressive termination are clear. But when things don't go wrong (vast majority of time),
81.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
One interesting application of this technique is how the world is generated in Noika: https://80.lv/articles/noita-a-game-based-on-falling-sand-si... They found that the herringbone pattern hides the grid pretty well a
82.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
This is a nice article, bringing together various color/perception concepts. For those interested, you may also like the article introducing the "OK Lab" color space[1] and others by the same author[2]. It's my current f
83.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Not so much the author's fault, but there's a bit of confusing terminology around the meaning of "pool" in memory allocator literature in general, and this article in particular. In this article, they say: > Pools ...
84.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
> It is a metaphysical question, not a scientific question. Well here I soundly agree with you. I believe that's what I was trying to communicate at the very start, when I said "those 'why' questions are exactly what
85.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
You bring a small constellation of points to mind; sorry for the multi-part reply: 1. The original question was about the natural world, not math, and I'd say that the connection between the two is not guaranteed by anything. So any co
86.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I disagree. There was a "why X" question, and then an equivalence was observed, saying "X = Y" (which is useful, to be sure), but at the end of the process, there is still only one "why" question — "why
87.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
I appreciate what you're saying, but I think you missed my point. In your example, you just moved the question of "why are there conservation laws" to "why are there symmetries?" The answer is still that we don&#x27
88.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Those "why" questions are exactly what math and science do not answer (: Not saying that philosophy or religion is particularly good at answering them either, but that's more the domain you're getting into, I think. Br
89.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Why is that? (genuine question) Just because an approximation is really good in some cases doesn't mean it's more than an approximation, does it?
90.
by turtledragonfly 3y ago
Your Holmes quote strikes a chord with a concept that I've had internally for a while: "bottom-up" vs "top-down" learning. I'm more of a "bottom-up" learner myself — I like to immerse myself in the de

More ›