zalack

That’s how I wake up in the morning

Have the various comment threads on a carousel once you click in. Because of the fractured nature of Lemmy servers I feel like I see way more reposts than on Reddit. It would be nice for them to get merged in some way.

Precision for what? Knowing their cron job will fire? Knowing what was wrong with the commands they sent? Neither of those are crazy precise or ambiguous statements?

The only highly precise thing that needs to happen is the alignment of the antenna but that system has been working for decades already and has been thoroughly tested.

NASA tends to be pretty straightforward when talking about risks, and if they feel like all the systems are in working order and there’s a good chance we’ll be back in contact with it, I think it’s worth talking them at their word.

Like yeah, it’s impressive they can aim an antenna that precisely, but using stars to orient an object is a very very well understood geometry problem. NASA has been using that technique at least as far back as Apollo

Lol. The knee-jerk contrarianism online really gets under my skin, especially when it’s towards experts.

Like yeah, sometimes experts are wrong or systems don’t behave as expected. But framing that as some sort of erudite insight really bugs me.

“I hope the recovery system works!” doesn’t need to be rewritten as “Mmm yes. But what these engineers haven’t considered is the possibility that they are wrong”.

This is one of those things that sounds meaningful, but can be said about literally any problem in any system. Not all knowledge requires the same level of precision for confidence.

If the engineers at NASA who are familiar with the system say this is a known error state that will be fixed the next time the system designed to correct it fires on its set schedule, there’s not a whole lot added by saying sure, but what if they’re wrong?

It’s just restating the table stakes of existence.

Lol, whoops

Can’t believe Hot Fuzz hasn’t been mentioned yet.

He doesn’t. White supremacists clinging to celebrities they desperately want to believe support their views only to be slapped down in disgust is a tale as old as time.

I seen to remember the documentary about her covering the decision to publicly voice her political beliefs for the first time. There’s this one scene where she’s in a room full of white men telling her not to do it because it would damage her brand and her mom being the only person in the room to support it.

She went against all her business advisors and did it anyway, which should tell you enough about where she stands.

Counterpoint: If I was one of the people in charge of keeping it secret and Trump got elected… I would just “forget” to ever schedule that briefing.

It’s worth pointing out that reproducible builds aren’t always guaranteed if software developers aren’t specifically programming with them in mind.

imagine a program that inserts randomness during compile time for seeds. Reach build would generate a different seed even from the same source code, and would fail being diffed against the actual release.

Or maybe the developer inserts information about the build environment for debugging such as the build time and exact OS version. This would cause verification builds to differ.

Rust (the programing language) has had a long history of working towards reproducible builds for software written in the language, for instance.

It’s one of those things that sounds straightforward and then pesky reality comes and fucks up your year.

The comment was about strategy, not objective.

IMO, it’s always better to try. Worst case scenario is that nothing changes, so no worse than if you didn’t. The only sane choice in that kind of situation is to pick the one with a chance for improvement.

In my experience, giving a shit about what you’re doing has a bunch of positing knock-on affects as well. You just end up feeling better about yourself. In your specific scenario it sounds like trying would also afford you the opportunity to live a happier life, and that’s worth chasing. The world is fucked, but scientists keep saying they if we act soon it’s not so fucked they we’re past the inflection point to un-fuck it.

Haven’t seen acollierasto mentioned yet.

She’s a scientist with a PHD in Astrophysics and does deep dives on specific topics, generally from the angle of science communication and how it often fails that topic in some way.

Her videos are very simple and low production value, but packed with information. She’s a great communicator and you walk away from each video, not just with better knowledge on a topic, but also with a sense of where the holes in that knowledge are. Like where the limits of the metaphor being used to covey the topic to you exist.

Apex Legends: Been playing since Season 0 with my SO and brother and I think it’s honestly the longest I’ve ever played a single game. The gunplay just feels so good.

Tears of the Kingdom: Still working my way through it, taking my time exploring. Honestly it’s such a great game, but I have to say the resource gathering is getting a little tedious. I like the weapon durability mechanic from the angle of being forced to switch up your fighting style, but I wish there was a way to repair weapons between fights.

Part of it is how you engage with the media. I worked in film for a while and when I watch a well-made TV show, I’m constantly analyzing the shot composition, editing, and sound.

What lens is this shot on? Where is the camera placed? How is it moving? What does that say about this character or moment?

When does a scene choose to use it’s closest shot on a character? Why that moment and not another?

How is the story or scene structured and do I think that works? What order are they revealing information to us and why?

When the scene pivots, what are they doing with craft to underline that. How is the balance of power between the characters changing and how is that being visualized?

Whose scene is it? Is that choice surprising? When they chose to show a character reacting rather than the one speaking, why?

Are the actors making surprising choices in their performance? Are they playing big moments small or small moments big? What ticks are they giving the character? What are they trying to say about who this person is with all that.

Visual media, like any other craft, is filled with hundreds of intentional choices every frame. Taking it in doesn’t have to be a passive experience on the viewers part. We don’t listen consider reading a book passive, and watching a film or television series doesn’t have to be pace either.

Just like books, not all television has the same depth to it’s choices, but as you actively take in various pieces of media, you’ll start to get a feel for the level of intentionality sleeping was made with. Like Andor has a lot more intentionality in it’s craft than The Book of Boba Fett.

I’m not saying that it’s good to watch hours of TV every day, but the time that you do spend watching television need not be time that you’re brain isn’t exercising itself.

Same situation as Relay for Reddit on Android.

Call me crazy but I think the top one looks better. The art style loses something in the bottom. The character and the background blend into each other two much, there’s line work outlining the character model that gets lost.

I came in here annoyed at them gaming the system and you totally turned my perspective around on it. Makes perfect sense.

I have like 80,000 total Reddit Karma on an 11-year-old account.

In four weeks on Kbin I’ve already gotten 3,100 reputation. It’s just a much nicer community than Reddit.

That’s what I meant. The GUI is all that 95% of end users interact with.