• 31 Posts
  • 39 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2024

help-circle













  • What do you mean?

    I just find that if pip did not support that version anymore, the software would be lost. As that is covered by making executables, as I mentioned them. But what if I wanted to have access to the libraries that were used in the program? That wouldn’t be possible. Because all we get in the source code is the dependency fetching, not the dependencies themselves.

    It would be good to have an alternative where you get all that you need to compile the code again, not depending on fetching them from websites that might not even have them anymore.

    This mentality of ephemeral code just adheres to the way big tech would like to do things, with programmed obsolescence.

    An alternative to that way of doing things would be nice and would make sure we get access to the same working open source program in 30 or 40 years.





  • I’m tired of people arguing that the sum of the people in the platform does not equal its culture. Facebook and other social networks clearly benefit from having influencers in their platform, and they make the platform orbit around it.

    People who use facebook are not responsible for old people posting what they want. But also, Facebook earns profit from that kind of behavior, so it makes its algorithms circle around it.

    It’s like saying Instagram isn’t responsible for all the influencers and the ‘vibe’ it has. It is responsible for it and you don’t make the platform your own, especially not with the Big players.

    Even Mastodon, where you can set up your own instance, has its culture, even if it is richer (culturally) than Instagram or Facebook.

    No, each person does not make the platform their own or make out of it what they will. Only a masochist would stay on Facebook preaching their own culture while they have other options that fit better.

    Your argument fails.

    Also, on another note, I’m tired of Carl Sagan’s atheists using Darwinism as basis for lack of a God, and I’m not a christian or muslim. That’s just reason to silence people who don’t want to take “scientific” argument at face value. True science is debatable and built upon healthy discussion. Not something you toss at other people to make them seem dumb or preach like a religion.





  • I think it’s interesting to see something related to the magic posted in the other article. What it’s all about. Also, the paper isn’t that complex to read. It goes through talking about quantum simulations (probably through Qiskit) and the differences between magical schemas and ordinary ones. I think it’s interesting to see what it’s all about.

    Scientific communicators try to be didactic about Science but always miss the mark on what’s really going on, especially in Quantum Mechanics. Sadly, we don’t see the same enthusiasm from these people for other areas of Physics - the classical.

    If you’re going to write “self-help” books on a scientific topic, might as well go all the way.

    What I mean is, this paper is a fun read. Someone that has a grasp about computers will understand and appreciate.