You’re not wrong so you get an upvote but in the context of this conversation you know people are not using LLM tools with preseeded entropy. Also kind of a moot point because the idea of using some consistent source of entropy in a calculator is competly nonsensical and unnecessary.

Lmao I use LLM powered tools in my work daily, I understand their limitations and stay within them so say what you will. I still think your comparison is dumb.

Your point is a false equivalence. Just because people said the same thing doesn’t mean a calculator and an LLM are equivalent in their accuracy as a tool.

You are implying that one must ensure the veracity of the output of a calculator in the same way that one must ensure the veracity of the output of an LLM and I’m saying no, that’s strictly not true. If it were than the only way you could use an LLM incorrectly would be to type your query incorrectly. With a calculator that metaphor holds up. With an LLM you could make no mistakes and still get incorrect output.

My point wasn’t that people don’t make mistakes they obviously do. My point is that calculators are deterministic machines; to clarify that means if they have the same input they will always have the same output. LLMs are not and do not. So no it’s not the same thing.

Your point has no bearing whatsoever on my statement. You could also misread a ruler but doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the ruler. Given I can reliably read a ruler, then I can ‘blindly trust’ it assuming it’s a well manufactured ruler. If you can’t that’s definitively a you problem.

Haha fair enough I guess I took first year to mean high school level physics but I took calculus in high school so that made sense to me.

Except calculators are based on reality and have deterministic and reliable results lol

Edit: holy crap I would never have guessed this statement would make people wanna argue with me. I’ve never felt that my job is secure from the next generation more than I do now.

Calculus was literally invented to describe physics. If you learn physics without learning basic derivative calculus along side it you’re only getting a part of the picture, so I’m guessing you derived something like y position in a 2 dimensional projectile motion problem cause that’s a fuckin classic. Sounds like you had a good physics teacher 👍

I mean if that’s true then that’s incredibly sad in itself as that would mean that not a single teacher in your past demonstrated a single thing you learned. You don’t need to be in a science field to do some basic chemistry or physics lab, I’m talking like even a baking soda volcano or a bowling ball vs feather drop test. You never participated in science fair? Or did the egg drop challenge? You never went on a field trip to look at some fossils or your local geology or wildlife? Did you ever watch an episode of Bill Nye?? I find your answer disingenuous and hard to believe frankly. If you truly have NEVER had any class at school that did anything to prove to you what you’re learning and only just told you, then you’re an example of perhaps the ultimate failure in education.

You never took a lab science course? Or wrote a proof in math?

Wear. Sunscreen. If I could offer you only one tip for the future, sunscreen would be it. The long term benefits of sunscreen have been proven by scientists, whereas the rest of my advice has no basis more reliable than my own meandering experience.

Lol okay there little buddy whatever you say!

I see what you’re saying but personally I don’t think it does; Michael Jordan is the GOAT. Not because some gen zer decided that he’s the GOAT and should be goated. The gall to think any one person can judge a something as being the GOAT therefore can declare it ‘goated’ is just rediculous to me.

Can we talk about goated too? Adding the ed at the end just makes it sound stupid. If you wanna say a comment is the greatest of all time, you can just say goat comment and it doesn’t sound so stupid. It’s like saying ‘excellented comment’. Like what?

Principle of least permission. I’m a dev and I still have to ask for temporary permission to even access customer infrastructure to solve production issues. Why should you need access to deployment infrastructure? I would deny you too, especially if your need could be solved by a local install of git.

Yup when I used to be into print timelapses and used my Sony A7iii, I accomplished it with a cheap relay, a cheap off camera trigger cable, a virtually free 3.5mm TRRS adapter, and the raspberry pi I was already running octaprint off of. Set a pin high on the pi that’s connected to the relay, which shorts a couple pins on the barrel adapter, which triggers the camera. Got pretty incredible results, too, but most of that comes down to controlling the lighting well.

Edit: Re-uploaded one of my old vids to show y’all. https://imgur.com/a/zPJ3yTu

That sir is some fluffy corn bread

I would say if you care about this go for a light/white/clear color stem and dye them yourself. I’ve seen in some keycap dying guides on geekhack that say clothing dyes meant for polyester clothes will give good results.

Eh I don’t think being verified means all that much because in my experience there are games that are verified that just don’t play well on a deck because the game doesn’t lend itself well to deck controls and there are others where the control factors keeping them from being verified are trivial but not addressable given valves strict definitions of ‘verified’. Example: Noita sucks on the deck and it’s verified. It’s like 10x more difficult to aim on the deck relative to a M+K setup and makes it feel clumsy as hell. Meanwhile, Against the Storm, Soulstone Survivors, Dwarf Fortress, and Civilization all have great experiences on the deck and I’ve happily played multiple hours of each chilling on my couch without a thought about the controls and none are verified.