• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • garyyo@lemmy.worldtoRisa@startrek.websiteSpace is 2D, right?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Realistically their does need to be some consideration but the medium they travel isn’t air, but the occasional speck of dust, hydrogen atom, and other small stuff. It’s not much but for interstellar travel there are still considerations needed, namely reducing your cross sectional area in the direction of travel. Long and thin gives you less drag since it hits less stuff.

    Regardless the airplane looks doesn’t make much sense anyway :)


  • garyyo@lemmy.worldtoRisa@startrek.websiteSpace is 2D, right?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Actually, space in general is mostly 2 dimensional, in that all the interesting stuff generally takes place on some sort of almost flat plane. A star system is generally on a plane, so is the galactic system, and for most planet+moons too. They just tend to be different planes so for ease of communication you will probably just align your idea of down with whatever the most convenient plane is. This of course is ignoring what gravity down is, as that changes as thrust does.

    And as for ship alignment, yeah no one is going to worry about that till its time to dock, at which point the lighter vessel will likely change their orientation since its easier and takes less energy. Spaceships are not going to be within human sight range of each other most of the time, even being in relatively the same are. Space too big and getting ships close to each other is dangerous!

    But in media that fucks with people’s idea of meeting and seeing each other so for convenience of not confusing the audience you don’t see that level of realism often.


  • garyyo@lemmy.worldtoRisa@startrek.websiteSpace is 2D, right?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    In more realistic scenarios, “down” is just defined by the direction of thrust. So approaching a ship, they will be down assuming you are decelerating to match their velocity, but they will be up if you are still thrusting towards them.

    But all of that has almost nothing to do with how people will think of orientation to other ships since generally speaking you won’t be using eye sight to communicate ship to ship. At that point an agreed upon down will be needed. Probably aligned with galactic or star system to establish a plane, and probably right hand rule to establish up and down. In general given that space is big and ships are small they will just be points on each others radar until they need to dock with each other so it doesn’t really matter how people are actually oriented, as long as when they communicate what they say makes sense to the other side.

    edit: or maybe down is towards the currently orbitted gravity well, like towards a planet/moon/star.


  • Idk about anyone else but its a bit long. Up to q10 i took it seriously and actually looked for ai gen artifacts (and got all of them up to 10 correct) and then I just sorta winged it and guessed and got like 50% of them right. OP if you are going to use this data anywhere I would first recommend getting all of your sources together as some of those did not have a good source, but also maybe watch out for people doing what I did and getting tired of the task and just wanting to see how well i did on the part i tried. I got like 15/20

    For anyone wanting to get good at seeing the tells, focus on discontinuities across edges: the number or intensity of wrinkles across the edge of eyeglasses, the positioning of a railing behind a subject (especially if there is a corner hidden from view, you can imagine where it is, the image gen cannot). Another tell is looking for a noisy mess where you expect noisy but organized: cross-hatching trips it up especially in boundary cases where two hatches meet, when two trees or other organic looking things meet together, or other lines that have a very specific way of resolving when meeting. Finally look for real life objects that are slightly out of proportion, these things are trained on drawn images, and photos, and everything else and thus cross those influences a lot more than a human artist might. The eyes on the lego figures gave it away though that one also exhibits the discontinuity across edges with the woman’s scarf.








  • A given programming language often has limitations which are largely different than the limitations from others. This means that different languages are often used on different kinds of problems. Want something fast, use C. Want to write something quickly, use python. Want it to run on just about anything, use Java. And so on.

    So why don’t we make one ultimate one or a few that fulfill all needs? Well, partially because we haven’t figured out how to do that, but also it’s really easy to learn yet another language once your understand how they work. I can write in python, js, c, c++, c#, Java, kotlin, rust, perl, ruby, php, forth, lisp, and I could keep on going for quite a while. The underlying concepts are largely the same and so picking up a new language is no big deal (though being good at it is a bigger deal). We have so many because ultimately it just doesn’t really matter that we have so many.






  • Well, the record high temperatures are what cause the forest fires so we do have to take that into account. And the radiant heat that the fire gives off dissipates with the inverse square law so that limits it’s contribution. Really it seems that the only major contributing factor to the increased heat, other than the effects of the already high ambient temperature and thus the decreased apparent humidity, are the excitation of the air molecules as they are transformed from elemental oxygen and plant matter into hydrogen hydroxide and carbon dioxide, along with other molecules due to incomplete combustion and contaminates. Overall I think a safe bet would be 2.




  • Necessity. When most of the software you use is reliant on Windows it’s hard to make Linux your daily driver. That being said, the changes needed to make it worth it are already done in limited contexts. Steam deck is pure Linux, the user interface and everything is implemented in a way that the user does not have to deal with the complexity, but the underlying mechanisms for doing wonky shit is still there if you want to mess with it. It’s kinda the best of both worlds in that sense.

    If we wanted a desktop experience to replicate that, you would just have to do the exact same thing. Abstract the user experience such that the layperson does not need to engage with the complicated bits, but leave them there for those that do want them. And arguably that is being done with some distros, but it’s just not quite there yet.