Whoa

873 points · 49 comments · view on lemmy.world

49 Comments

Seraph@fedia.io · 68 pts · 1y (19 replies)

Science is indistinguishable from magic, if you don't care to learn how science works.

lugal@sopuli.xyz · 24 pts · 1y (12 replies)

Or how magic works

Dicska@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 1y (11 replies)

But... if there's a consistent system along which magic works which can be studied/researched/formulated, then isn't it just... science?

umbrella@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 1y (4 replies)
[ removed ]
Malfeasant@lemm.ee · 6 pts · 1y (2 replies)

Study a 6502. It's just electrons doing the only thing they can.

umbrella@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1y (1 reply)
[ removed ]
Malfeasant@lemm.ee · 2 pts · 1y

I don't know about the best (because I started back in the 80s with a commodore 64, not exactly repeatable) but a good way is this guy: https://eater.net/6502

Matriks404@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1y

Assembly isn't magic. Computers compiling/interpreting high-level languages into assembly, and making everything works without constantly breaking IS MAGIC

djsoren19@yiffit.net · 4 pts · 1y

The keyword is consistent. Some settings have magic as inherently chaotic and difficult to control.

A good rule of thumb is that if a fantasy setting has a school for magic, it's probably a science. If it's knowledge passed from master to magically gifted student, it's probably not very consistent.

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz · 3 pts · 1y

Yes.

lugal@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 1y (2 replies)

That's not how magic works

fsxylo@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1y (1 reply)

magic works

Humans have yet to prove it.

lugal@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 1y

Well, it sometimes does

kamenlady@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 1y

Watch "Agatha all Along" - the series is managing to answer exactly this question with a great script and cast.

/s

ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 1y (4 replies)

I absolutely feel like in a thousand years, we'll talk to a machine and not even know how it works.

Hell, I look at the computer in front of me and only feel like I know a fraction of what's going on.

CheesyGordita@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1y

Hail the Omnissiah!

BlackPenguins@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 1y (2 replies)

That's what neural networks are now. We do not know how it works under the hood. We just feed it training data.

bus_factor@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 1y

We know how it works, but we can't explain exactly how it got to the answers.

LillyPip@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y

We do, though.

Just to make sure my understanding was accurate, I asked Gemini to critique my explanation:

.

Unless it’s lying to me about itself, I was able to explain the basics of it in two relatively simple sentences. Of course that doesn’t cover everything, but Gemini thinks that’s a pretty good overview. After expanding on each point in its reply, it said this:

I think a lot of the confusion over these models stems from hype and marketing that makes them out to be more than what they are.

Etienne_Dahu@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 1y

Magnets, how do they work?

merc@sh.itjust.works · 37 pts · 1y (2 replies)

I just love how the conspiracies reinforce each-other in the most convenient ways.

"Anyone who doesn't get vaxed is going to be put in a FIMA concentration camp!"

"What? That's crazy, where's the evidence of that?!"

"You can't find it because they're censoring everything on the Internet."

So now, not finding evidence of conspiracy 1 is evidence for conspiracy 2!

Thassodar@lemm.ee · 10 pts · 1y (1 reply)

"You can find the truth at www.truthfindarz.net, but I don't go there because it's full of conspiracies."

facepalm

goatbeard@lemm.ee · 3 pts · 1y

I'm disappointed that's not a real link lol

edgemaster72@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 1y (4 replies)

I don't believe a lot of conspiracy theories, but I do have some conspiracy hypotheses

LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y (3 replies)

I have conspiracy speculations

kusari@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 1y (2 replies)

I have conspiracy guestimations

LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Sometimes when I'm alone I have conspiracy masturbations

kusari@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1y

When you are at the Diddy party and you have a conspiracy ejaculation:

RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Also: when conspiracy theories are convenient ways to avoid havig to understand how things work.

LillyPip@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1y

And this a very common mindset, because most societies (some more than others) take children’s* innate curiosity and pound it flat for the sake of efficiency by way of standardisation. It really is a shame, since we waste a lot of potential as a species this way.

e: a word

lugal@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 1y

That's what they want you to believe!

lath@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1y

It's only a conspiracy theory if it's not a proven conspiracy.

UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1y (10 replies)

Its only a conspiracy theory if its more than one guy.

spankmonkey@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1y (9 replies)

It could be girls!

lugal@sopuli.xyz · 5 pts · 1y (8 replies)

Not a native speaker but "guy" is gender neutral for a while now, at least on the variety used online. At least from what I know

ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 1y (3 replies)

Litmus test is the "Would you have sex with a group of guys?"

If you're picturing a orgy with hairy people holding shlongs, then it's not gender neutral.

UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Litmus test is the “Would you have sex with a group of guys?”

Dipping the tip into a group of guys and checking the color.

Vandals_handle@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y

Based

merc@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 1y

"Guy" is used differently in different contexts, just like "girl".

If someone says "the girls had a sleepover" you know they're probably talking about female children. If someone's talking about a girls' night out, you know they're almost certainly talking about women.

"Would you have sex with a group of guys?” is using guy as a stand-in for man. But, if someone said "Guys, can we all just quiet down for a second so Stan can speak?" it's a synonym for "folks" or "people" or something gender-neutral.

CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 1y (3 replies)

You are correct but you can't get away from pedants online.

I know because I'm one of them.

anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 1y (2 replies)

Well then you're not my friend, guy.

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz · 5 pts · 1y

He's not your guy buddy!

CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1y

Oh no

Katana314@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Throwing a line from Hitman in the mix to make it more confusing:

“If it looks like a conspiracy, it probably isn’t.”

lustyargonian@lemm.ee · 1 pts · 1y

Why does it look like that then? Tananananana 🎵

Panurge987@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 1y (1 reply)

I'm just glad to see "whoa" spelled correctly.

doingthestuff@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y
[ removed ]
bizarrocullen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y

Wrong use of meme

SuperApples@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y

Good use of Keanu meme, as he recently fell for and is promoting a conspiracy theory (ancient civilizations).

masterofn001@lemmy.ca · 0 pts · 1y (2 replies)

Conversely, everything is a conspiracy when you do understand how things work.

yboutros@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 1y

Underrated comment

Everyone's conspiring folks. What's hard to measure, is who's conspiring

LillyPip@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1y

It’s important to understand the prevalence of coincidence and incompetence. Humans are exceptional at pattern-finding – too good, really. In order to think critically, we need to recognise our own tendency to find patterns where none exist.