• 0 Posts
  • 108 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle
  • No, I’m saying the ones who say it’s evil to bring kids into this world are hypocrites if they themselves want to keep existing in this world but think a child couldn’t possibly want to exist in it.

    Like anti-natalist, not just child free. I don’t think anyone has a duty to have kids and think not wanting kids is a great reason to not have them. I even disagree with doctors who refuse to sterilize people who would rather remove that possibility than keep the risk (and think the doctors should be shielded from any consequences when a patient later regrets that decision). I’d also call it fair if you said some people have no business having kids.

    But there’s some people online who take that position to the next level and say that anyone having kids these days is wrong to do so.

    It’s pathetic, considering how existence itself was a struggle for the past 3 billion years, then gets easier over the last like 100k, and now there’s new challenges and anti-natalists want us to just give up because it is hard?

    And inconsistent because they don’t want to give up themselves, but want everyone else to not give future generations a chance.

    And I didn’t say they should kill themselves, but if they believe existence is so painful and hopeless that creating new life is wrong, why haven’t they? Though that “if they are serious about it” is the crux of my position: I believe they are being dramatic or overcompensating for those other assholes that insist having kids is our only purpose and that everyone should have them and gets in their business about not wanting kids themselves.

    I also believe that kids born during a collapse will probably have an easier time handling it (emotionally) than those of us who got used to life before a collapse. It’s just hard to say if that will apply to kids born soon or if it won’t be the case for some decades yet.


  • A variation of this that I realized fairly recently is that striving for excellence doesn’t mean the journey towards it is garbage. I can both feel pride in what I’ve done while also acknowledging where it could have been better with the intent to either circle back and do it better in the future (for like house projects) or avoid that mistake next time (for creations).

    Like I did a cross stitch of a wolf and it skewed a bit because it had a lot of half-stitching (without going into too much detail, a full cross stitch equalizes the forces the threads put on the canvas while a half-stitch puts an uneven force on it). So for my current one, I got hoops that I previously didn’t think I needed, which hold the canvas in place outside so the threads are less likely to put a high force where they are.

    And my next one will involve a better ordering strategy because my fairly random approach caused some areas of the canvas to bunch up more than others. Less noticeable than the wolf’s skew, but still a flaw I’d like to fix going forward but I’m not beating myself up about the current one.

    Assuming this is even relevant to the context you mean lol.









  • Very efficiently.

    Or for a less cheeky answer, I believe the method they used at a high level was pointing a camera at a few guide stars, so the 30 lines of assembly might have been a loop that checked those cameras for any drift of those stars and did a correction pulse of the rotation boosters to keep them centered. Oh, one of the references might have been the signal strength from home, too (signal gets weaker if the antenna isn’t aligned).

    Unless it was an emergency, it might only need to look at 5 pixels to determine alignment and correction.

    Also, just because it’s assembly doesn’t mean it can’t call subroutines and functions, so that 30 lines might be misleading in the way those several lines in the other reply have way more going on. That said, if it’s just doing a pixel brightness comparison, that’s one line to read the central pixel, then for each direction one line to read that pixel, one more to compare, one line to jump to next comparison if center is brighter, one instruction to initiate correction burn, one instruction to stop it immediately after, then one instruction to return to the start of the loop… Which comes to 22 lines total, leaving 8 for logging or maybe timing the burn. And that’s assuming their instruction set didn’t have anything fancy like read and compare, compare and jump, or a single instruction burn pulse.











  • It was a different commenter, though I also like snacking on dark chocolate chips. Baker’s chocolate is also good, but the consistency of the squares isn’t great for snacking.

    I just read it as a tip for how to get chocolate anyways, even if all the chocolate bar makers stop using it. The chocolate-like but cheaper stuff they are using instead of chocolate sounds more like the dustbowl/depression era tricks to enjoy food while you can’t afford it.

    Though part of my perspective is from getting my cooking to a level where store bought prepared stuff is just the easy/convenient option, not the high quality one (for health or taste). I also love dark chocolate and prefer the high cocoa content ones over must chocolate bars.