>>2013
Viewing the universe as a cellular automaton seems pretty neat, and there appears to at least be some people [1] working on this approach, reconciling the results with the seeming implausibility of the conspiracy that initial conditions and determinism always conspire to result in violations of Bell's inequality.

I don't have the depth to go through that paper though so I'm not sure how valid it is.

[1] https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319412849

>>2014
Related (and serendipitously published just today):
http://nautil.us/issue/83/intelligence/how-to-make-sense-of-quantum-physics

>>2014
>>2015
Thank you very much for your response and for your links.

>>2016
Some other good articles on superdetermism by the leading researchers in that niche. It definitely seems like it's something that should at least be explored instead of dismissed outright.
https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-forgotten-solution-superdeterminism.html
https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.06462

cold boot attack with default encryption on android 4.0 galaxy nexus

https://www1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/frost

set your phone free

https://fsfe.org/campaigns/android/android.html

Is there a reason why adblocker apps for android always seem to use vpn connections? Why is this necessary? Are there any out there that don't use one(rooted phone or otherwise)?

>>1502
Because you cannot set the hosts file on an unrooted phone, so the only way to do it at a global level is by tunneling all traffic through a local vpn which can then be locally filtered. If you just want adblock in a browser you can get that via firefox plus extensions or similar chromium variants that support adblock.

If you're rooted you can use adaway which uses the hosts file method (last I checked). There is also the option of using a custom dns pointed either at a local pi-hole server or a publicly hosted pi-hole. It seems the option to use a custom dns was only added in android 9, so for older versions you'll have to root it and modify one of the initrc files to override the dhcp-acquired value.

>>1999
>the challenge for them isn't the programming part but the community part. And sadly that's not something you can just throw more effort at.
I know this is OT, but I'm a tad interested in how one might go about cultivating a community if one doesn't have any friends (online or otherwise). The only method I am able to imagine is advertising your board and engaging in niche(r) topics.

>>2000
Good luck. As a tip, before writing any markup and CSS, draw your desired layout on paper or using a program; then choose what colors you'd like to use on your webpages.

nice work

>>2001
>I'm a tad interested in how one might go about cultivating a community if one doesn't have any friends (online or otherwise).
There's a thread on this.
>>/ot/32344

Post edited on 19th Feb 2020, 6:04am

>>2003
Ah thanks

It's not much of a war at this point when your only browser choices are essentially Firefox or rebranded Chromium. Even Microsoft threw in the towel with Trident.

And while the performance improvements in Firefox since the "quantum" update are supposedly nice, they manage to make the UI worse every update.

>>1991
Making UIs worse with every update seems to be a staple of modern day programing across the board.

>>1993
I'm convinced that it's because the UI/UX team needs to justify their salary somehow. While I can at least avoid updating desktop applications, I'm growing increasingly tired of having to maintain a hodgepodge of css to revert the fuckery websites continue to introduce.

>>1994
Yeah UI dev teams, consultants and marketing devisions and the like. All convincing the guys in charge these things need to keep being updated to stay relevant. Because no one would use chrome or youtube or windows if they didn't keep fixing updating UI right?

>>1983
>specific case of the Binomial theorem where y is 0.
I don't think you can apply this directly. Binomial theorem states that

(x+y)^n = Sum{nCk x^(n-k) y^k}. Substituting y=0 into this just collapses the sum to its first term, which is x^n. Additionally the expression OP has involves alternating sums of binomial coefficients.

I'm pretty sure the combinatorial proof posted is valid. I'm not sure if you can find a nice algebraic proof for it. I don't recall ever seeing an algebraic proof for binomial theorem (only the combinatorial one and induction. You could probably find some sort of inductive proof but I couldn't go anywhere with that.

>I mean, I don't get whether you are trying to understand it or to come up with a different proof or something.
I agree that there's not too much to generalize from this particular problem. However if OP is interested in this sort of stuff he should look up "combinatorial proofs." You'll find lots of delightful identities similar to the one he posted, which can be proved with very clever combinatorial arguments. Things such as sum{k=0..n, nCk)^2} = (2n)C(n).

One person said that this might just be the binomial theorem. I decided to explore this. From Wikipedia, one can see the formula for the binomial expansion when applied to (1+x)^n. I decided to apply this and substitute my result for n^a to see what emerges. This doesn't seem to resemble anything I've seen before. I must confess that I have seen "generating functions" on Wikipedia but even then, they're not similar to what I have here.
I hope the colour-coding makes my work easier to follow.
I think I'll return once more to post the equation for (m+n)^a at which point, the binomial theorem will be fully expressed as a linear combination of binomial coefficients. After that, there's nothing left but to derive a proof of the original rule I stumbled upon.

>>1983
The goal I intend to tackle at some point is to prove the formula I discovered i.e. that n^a can be expressed as a linear combination of binomial coefficients (or one could call it a a finite, alternating series of combinations, whichever one is most intuitive to you). As it stands, it seems to merely "work". That one side of the equation is the equivalent of the other remains unexplained.

>>1984
>I'm not sure if you can find a nice algebraic proof for it. I don't recall ever seeing an algebraic proof for binomial theorem
I don't know if there's a proof for the binomial theorem but nonetheless, I believe there might be an algebraic proof for this rule I've stumbled upon i.e. an algebraic proof that one is the equivalent of the other.

>I agree that there's not too much to generalize from this particular problem
What makes you so certain that I couldn't stretch this to complex numbers and have imaginary binomial coefficients?
Also, I researched "summation of binomial coefficients" and so I've seen what you speak of. It's very interesting that somebody already found a way to talk

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>1988
Since you're familiar with generating functions, here's a proof based on that. I think this is the cleanest algebra-only proof you'll be able to get for this, since usually proving combinatorial identities can get really tricky in general and there's no nice structure to this problem that you can induct over.

>What makes you so certain that I couldn't stretch this to complex numbers and have imaginary binomial coefficients?

You can have those of course; I think you'd have to use the generalized notion of a binomial where factorial is replaced by it's analytic continuation (gamma function). Once you go there I'm not sure if the proofs given (either combinatorial or via generating functions) still hold, since you've got issues of convergence to worry about.

>>1989
I'd seen the generating functions on Wikipedia however I did not understand them. I must confess that presently, they are beyond my knowledge. This thread is definitely something I will return to another time.

>>1910
The only other thing I can think of is asking some more knowledgeable people--like the main developer himself.
From Grabber's homepage:
>If you have any questions about the program, found a bug and don’t want to use the github issue tracker, or anything, you can contact me by mail in French or in English at bio.nus@hotmail.fr.
I don't know if the issue tracker is an appropriate place since it's about reporting issues and not soliciting help. An IRC channel or forum would really be beneficial.
In any case, good luck.

I have a horrible coil whine problem.
My graphics card started making awful noises today, I can't figure out what the fuck.
Up until now it would often hiss or whistle on things like loading screens or intros like most cards do, but never made any sounds outside of that.
Today it started buzzing and whining like a dying lightbulb (but louder) almost constantly, even on idle in desktop. Sometimes it stops for a couple of seconds. The noise changes in pitch when doing things like scrolling and dragging windows. Stops when the monitor is disconnected. Stops when all windows and programs get closed but then starts again.
I didn't notice any problems other than the noise.
The noise is so fucked up I had to uninstall the thing. Please help.

>>1985
It's not the fans on the gpu is it? I find it hard to imagine anything else on it making an actual sound.

>>1986
>I find it hard to imagine anything else on it making an actual sound
Not OP but coil whine is a pretty-well known quirk of electronics. I think it's the inductor that's actually responsible. I have this on my laptop on any gpu intensive workload.

I think besides mitigations like double-checking inductors are secured to the board and getting a soundproof case, there's not much that can be done.

>>1826
I think most of the internet isn't going to bother.
It's going to be cheaper for them to just cut off the EU peasants from the greater net than to try and conform to EU's fantasy demands.
Only the multinational goliaths will prevail, though I doubt they will be able to make significantly more money off of us anyway.
I mean the majority of us euro-peons is already poor as niggers and we're only getting poorer. It's going to be hard to squeeze out anything more.
Fucking Eurogulag.

>>1827
>Regarding Youtube and Co
As >>1828 mentioned, the big companies are going to be pretty unaffected. They can afford to (and already have) developed ML based content ID systems to automatically take down content. Google, Facebook, and co. will probably set it to be even stricter in the EU and call it a day.

Meanwhile the law will only hurt small startups and indie businesses because they can't afford to/don't have the manpower to do the above. And it'll also hurt end-consumers as an end result in two ways: 1) there'll be less competition from these small businesses and eventually people won't bother trying to create services catering to EU citizens so they'll be stuck with big goliaths that will only become entrenched and incumbent. 2) Smaller niche content/sites may also become unavailable to EU citizens, as even those possibly under the exception clause mentioned may not want to risk violations or bother so they'll just block EU IPs.

OP here again. Ya'll hangin' in there?

>>1977
I guess "internet of things" is how they're sneaking in their privacy violations now. You can't even take a walk outside without being in the sight of shitty "smart" doorbells.

>>1969
There's a branch of the Neko Project emulator which can run windows 98. I don't know how possible that is on any physical models. I do know different models have different specs and some stuff that would work on one might not on another. Emulators are better for experimental type stuff since you can adjust the specs how ever you want, even with greater capabilites than any real model of a system.

https://sites.google.com/site/np21win/

>>1968
If you want to do something on the PC-98, why not start with doing stuff in BASIC?
http://worholicanada.mydns.jp/pc98/00303.html

>>1971
That image is a troll-post right? I mean they're good projects, but a few of them seem to have their difficulties completely off. E.g. why are "Game of Life" and "English sentence parser" both medium. The former is a straightforward recursive program while the latter is a relatively sophisticated NLP project (unless you just call into a pre-existing library). Similarly why is "text editor" hard but "javascript debugger" medium.

>>1971
>Design a Game Engine in Unity
A game engine within a game engine?

>>1952
Nanotechnology in medical delivery has been approved by the FDA and is used. Doxil is encased in liposomes to extend their period of effectiveness for example. There's also titanium dioxide in sunscreen. Nanotechnology is also used to improve products which alredy exist like bandages fused with silver nanoparticles. Here's an entire website about this.
http://www.nanotechproject.org/cpi/

Nanorobots however do still seem stuck in the research phase.

>>1953
That's a neat website! Thank you for sharing it.

Nanotech engenieering student here, yes ,nanotech has been since 1990s, in a lot of products most of it casues cancer,, there are a lot of nanomaterials, i hate nanomedicine but it is one of the most advanced areas, besides nanoelectronics, nanomagnetism is the future, idk what tell, some examples of nano in your everyday lives are titanium dioxide as a catalizer for som windows or as a food aditive which causes cancer but no enterprise want to aknowledge it, uh there are a lot of nanocarbon composites in some products uhhh have i mentioned carbon fiber?, nanotransistors etc etc etc

>>1974
Is nanotechnology your actual major, or is it material engineering? Would you say a biomedical engineering major could get in the field?
>i hate nanomedicine
Why?

>to store all data in exchange for some cryptocurrency
The mention of cryptocurrency tends to lead me to dismiss projects on sight.

That said, it seems the primary advantage this has over bittorrent based protocols is the routing encryption? I've also heard of IPFS but haven't looked into that too much, and am not sure what significant benefits it offers over bittorrent+mainline DHT.

>>1965
I don't think you understand the scope. The goal of safenet is not to just to send and store files. It's meant as an entire replacmenet for the http protocol. Websites, applications, everything that currently exists on this "internet". The idea is a complete replacement with zero oversight on the overall network. Torrents rely on seeders and the information can't be accessed in real time. People who store data for safenet wont even know what they're helping to store. Nobody will.

>>1704

Still a long, long ways away from singularity.

I'd welcome some innovative and new technologies, but everything for the last 3 decades has been iterative improvements to shit that already existed, combined with 'planned obsolescence' so that it stops working if you wait too long before buying the next iteration.

The end point of technology will be our destruction. Man is a cosmic accident, there is no point to us, but we still can function because our environment is still reasonably close to the original. Our biological programing still good enough for our situation. Yet more and more technology changes the game faster than nature can alter her program. Take obesity as an example, for nearly all of human history there was no such thing as a problem of constantly having too much food. In the last hundred years technology has made food abundant, making our own biological drives so suited to millions of years of hominid life moot. How will man's programed urges react to the new weights on the scales? What will happen when chance no longer is a major factor on human lives? What happens when most people become useless, when the systems we make outstrip their creators? What happens when we can alter genes freely. Or when we can alter people's moods, their minds, their capabilities? What happens when one can retreat into a virtual world to reign as God?

We will break ourselves. We will see what we really are. Living automata, a biological paradox, an abomination, an absurdity, an exaggeration of disastrous nature. Nature will no longer be able to correct her mistakes, we will be a species made almighty without, but equally a menace to its own well-being.

The results will be disastrous. Technology will peak when we can freely change one of two things, ourselves or the environment. In time those who change themselves will become infinitely malleable nothings, true Sartreans who's existence may blink out in an instant, both more and less than human. Those that seek not to change themselves but that which is external to them will retreat into virtual worlds, induced feelings, human similcra, a solipsistic suicide. In any case it will be nothing short of collective death. So long as technology advances faster than nature can create counter-measures, we will overshoot her target, blowing us apart in the process.

In genesis man's original sin was to eat from the tree of knowledge. Technology, fruit of knowledge, will perfect our fall. It will be a final complete fall where we shall lose even the memory of paradise. We will finally know ourselves for what we are, stand apart from ourselves look upon our species and find

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

The ultimate goal of technology is replacing us, soft bags of suffering flesh into a trans-species capable of the great sacrifices needed for conquering the universe.

>Do you think that, overall, it is improving our lives, or making it worse?
Well if you believe Kaczynski, "the Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race." Reading over his essay again, he was pretty prescient about political issues brewing today and his argument that technology takes away individual freedom and leaves purposeless "surrogate" activities in its vacuum certainly seems compelling. The issue is that it's really hard to make a definitive comparison since we have no frame of reference for the alternative Kaczynski seems to propose: reverting back to a hunter-gatherer style society. Sure we might have a greater sense of purpose in our lives, but that might only be because we're busy fending off tigers and too preoccupied food and survival to worry about anything else.