![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://slrpnk.net/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemmy.ml%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2Fd3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
That is an interesting source. Thanks for the link!
That is an interesting source. Thanks for the link!
That’s why you feed that flame once in a while.
I read every line as 4 syllables of which the 2nd and 4th are stressed. The last line is 7 syllables and can be read as two more lines of 4 beats: (pause) I am AN / aus-TRA-li-AN.
Fits perfectly that way in my opinion.
This is still salvageable by pronouncing it as “an earl”.
Syllables, LSD to MSD.
Hello there, Geschwister :)
I agree, and I love how it has these younger words with a vivid etymology, how it shares so many common roots with English, German, the Scandinavian languages, and a serving of French, but also sprinkles of many other languages from its seafaring and otherwise trading history. And I love the grammar rules that allow one to be precise and concise in many things (but there we must definitely bow to German).
Water bearer makes much more sense, thanks! I did notice the images where a guy carries a jug, but as a kid, I always imagined the water man to be some kind of elemental, and I never consciously challenged that idea. Haha.
In Dutch we don’t use the Latin names for zodiac signs (and we call them “sterrenbeelden”, which means “star images” or maybe “star statues”). Aquarius is “waterman”, which I guess would translate to (surprise) “water man”.
Why? Not sure, but it might be because of Simon Stevin who insisted we use Dutch words for mathematical concepts, and thought up some words like “evenwijdig” (“same distancey”) for “parallel” and “wiskunde” (“certainty knowledge”) for mathematics.
Was looking for the dog :( Agree nonetheless
Would you watch a movie about it, though?
(Spoilers for Hollow Knight: The Grimm Troupe)
This reminds me of a certain boss in that expansion. Enjoy!
I like that I can hear that omitted space there.
git was designed to be decentralized. Everyone can (technically, but it is not too hard to set up if you have some affinity with servers) fork/clone another git repository and serve it up. It has built-in ways to synchronize with any other server. In fact, that synchronizing is what most developers do when they use git.
Of course, that would make it harder to know which repository has the “official” version, but in a way, that is maybe also a benefit of decentralisation. Knowing what code is authentic can be done by signing the commits.
The hubs that we see, are usually a combination of git and a way to serve the code, along with documentation, roadmap, bug tracking, automatic testing and building and the resulting binaries in a visually pleasing way. That does not need to be a part of decentralizing the code, and it is not the only way to do it.
Some of that can also be done with git built-in tracking of files, and the building and testing can probably also done in other locations, as long as there are files describing how to do that bundled with the code (which practically all projects already do).
Sourcehut (https://sr.ht) is one hub that helps developers use simpler tools for those workflows, and I think that’s a good place to find some inspiration.
Reply to self: really not that useful. That would be the same as just throwing all variables/coordinates of the solution in a set, forgetting their names and then filling them back in as some kind of madlibs experiment. And multiple solutions don’t grow with the exponent on x, that is just an odd/even thing. Don’t know shat I was thinking…
Haha I got that :) @Urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone is right, I was halfheartedly looking for a logic system in which it could make sense. Still, I would have major issues with the first step as it is shown, but I am wondering about systems where, say, each x <- {..}
, then what would be the set, and the probability of the correct solution.
Something I need to be more awake for, and it may be easier to solve without resorting to powers and roots, haha.
Would it be a rabbit hole to try and find any merit in this solution when interpreting it as: “if x is in a superposition of 2 and -2, the x + 2 = x - 2
would be true in 1/4 of the observations”, or something like that?
It is the closest thing to a “solution” that I can imagine, but doesn’t fit any laws that I know of or understand, and would probably break down on any scrutiny, but it feels like something is there.
Excuse me, sir, this is a well-respected barbershop.