single thread go brrr

In grocery stores in many parts of the US at least, it is extremely hard not to find bread in plastic bags. Even the one of 3 near me that has its own bakery puts the bread in a plastic bag, and then in another bag that is paper with a plastic “window”, and the paper part has a PE wax lining for god knows what reason.

A French-American guy (grew up in US) in my school described an encounter at a zoo when he was a young. Apparently, he ran up to the exhibit and shouted, “look! it’s a daddy fuck and a mommy fuck with a baby fuck!”, much to the chagrin of his parents.

Oh, I’m sure this’ll end well.

/s

Nijmegen? Is it particularly exceptional, or just normal Dutch? /'nɛɪ.meː.ɣə(n)/, in a GenAm accent I would imagine something like NYE-may-ghen or NAY-may-ghen… but being American, it’s not something I’ve ever actually heard one of my compatriots say aloud.

That’s some expensive cereal…

So you’re saying that you don’t like trying to relight the thermal oxidizer for the formaldehyde stream that went out due to spillover from another process, with an emergency flare? Got it.

I mean, sure, things like that are super dangerous, but at least they’re obviously, flashily dangerous and for that reason have a lot more attention paid to them. The real nasties are arguably the ones that aren’t so flashy but are much more common amd don’t have immediate effects. Formaldehyde and benzene will give you cancer, and acrylate monomers will make it so you one day wake up allergic to the modern world.

Nah, we just use it to define inches and pounds and the like.

Man I just built a new rig last November and went with nvidia specifically to run some niche scientific computing software that only targets CUDA. It took a bit of effort to get it to play nice, but it at least runs pretty well. Unfortunately, now I’m trying to update to KDE6 and play games and boy howdy are there graphics glitches. I really wish HPC academics would ditch CUDA for GPU acceleration, and maybe ifort + mkl while they’re at it.

So many solver solutions that day, either Z3 or Gauss-Jordan lol. I got a little obsessed about doing it without solvers or (god forbid) manually solving the system and eventually found a relatively simple way to find the intersection with just lines and planes:

1. Translate all hailstones and their velocities to a reference frame in which one stone is stationary at 0,0,0 (origin).
2. Take another arbitrary hailstone (A) and cross its (rereferenced) velocity and position vectors. This gives the normal vector of a plane containing the origin and the trajectory of A, both of which the thrown stone must intersect. So, the trajectory of the thrown stone lies in that plane somewhere.
3. Take two more arbitrary hailstones B and C and find the points and times that they intersect the plane. The thrown stone must strike B and C at those points, so those points are coordinates on the line representing the thrown stone. The velocity of the thrown stone is calculated by dividing the displacement between the two points by the difference of the time points of the intersections.
4. Use the velocity of the thrown stone and the time and position info the intersection of B or C to determine the position of the thrown stone at t = 0
5. Translate that position and velocity back to the original reference frame.

It’s a suboptimal solution in that it uses 4 hailstones instead of the theoretical minimum of 3, but was a lot easier to wrap my head around. Incidentally, it is not too hard to adapt the above algorithm to not need C (i.e., to use only 3 hailstones) by using line intersections. Such a solution is not much more complicated than what I gave and still has a simple geometric interpretation, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader :)

Huh TIL. Growing up with the merger, I suppose I’ve come to assume that non-merger folks have different pronunciations for any words with a- or o-adjacent spellings.

cot-caught merger be like that sometimes

♪ How 'bout I do ANYWAY ♪

Khshenshchizhevoshitseh poviat wenkowovih

Yeah, transliterating to an English spelling doesn’t help much.

I think rz is linguistically equivalent to a soft r, so in this case rze would be “ре”, not “ж”. In some areas, rz is pronounced closer to the Czech ř. IIRC, ж transliterates to ż (not to be confused with ź, which is a soft z). The Polish Roman alphabet is very regular and well adapted to the language, representing palatalization and other non-Latin sounds as digraphs in a similar way to Italian or English.

The cyrillicization of Polish was historically done to a limited extent, but carried with it some, shall we say, sociopolitical baggage. There are also some peculiarities to Polish that either don’t exist or have ambiguous transliterations into Cyrillic, such as the Polish nasals ą and ę or ó (historically a long o, but currenly pronouned /u/).

Neat, thanks for the clarification. Even though the initial proportion is 50/50 for X-activation, are there scenarios where one daughter line is more prominent than the other, or does it usually remain 50/50?

This is not true. That women cannot have the congenital dichromacy (or anomalous trichromacy) that biological males commonly have is flat out wrong. A biological female can still be a protan or deutan, but the phenotype requires that both X chromosomes carry the recessive color vision-deficient alleles. Nevertheless, given that ~8% of all X chromosomes have such a gene regardless of sex, the incidence in the female population is still around half a percent, which is not insignificant.

Interestingly, one form of tetrachromacy in females actually has the same cause as color vision deficiency in some males (specifically anomalous trichromacy). From what I understand, only one X chromosome is active per cone cell, and which one is active is random. So, half of such a person’s cone cells of one type are “normal” while the rest of that type are anomalous and have a slightly different peak wavelength. The net result is four different types of cone cells, i.e., tetrachromacy, which may have an incidence of more than 10% in females.

Don’t worry, I was being 100% facetious! After all, γ is generally believed to have been a hard /g/ in Ancient Greek, which is the version of Greek that “graphic” is based on and is CLEARLY the wrong way to say gif :D

Kinda sorta un-jerking (but not really) for a moment, I don’t think that I’d include the rhotic in your hypothetical pronunciation in NASA and thus would say /neæ.sə/ over /neɚ.sə/. I also don’t palatalize the U in SCUBA (/sku:.bə/, not /sk^(j)u:bə/), but I suspect that’s just a dialectical difference.

Edit: I just saw your NZ lemmy instance name and now I understand the vowel choices. Cheers!

Well, you see, the g in gif stands for “graphics” which is ultimately from Greek “γραφικός,” and because this is the 21st century, γ in front of a close front vowel is pronounced as neither /g/ nor /d͡ʒ/ but rather /ʝ/, which is pronounced a bit like English’s y, so in its purest rendition gif is really pronounced “yiff”, which doubles as homage to the online communities that OP frequents.