« first day (3319 days earlier)      last day (51 days later) » 

12:07 AM
@ACuriousMind that's part of the reason why work blocks most SE sites: they pay us to do other things
The other reason is related to posting while working (or via work computers) is tantamount to publishing as the company & if we say the wrong things, then we're all in trouble
 
@KyleKanos My work doesn't block SE, and it would be pointless anyway since we're generally allowed to work from home. They pay me for results, not eight hours a day in the office :P I just go to the office because I find it easier to actually work and produce those results there.
 
@ACuriousMind imagine trying to work from home & have a few kids trying to climb on you... that's why I go to the office
They let us have Math, SO, Software Engineering & Physics, but not TeX (though we write TeX-ish documents all the time)
 
No, I think we do have that one too. Just no one uses it
The maths part of the job isn't the difficulty, writing good code is
 
12:48 AM
@ACuriousMind I'm also ambivalent about hiding the close voters. The person most likely to be resentful towards the close voters is the OP, but they can still see the close voter's names. OTOH, on many sites (& on SO, in a given language tag), it often happens that a relatively small number of users cast a lot of close votes. I guess there's a benefit to not repeatedly show those names to the newbie population.
@AaronStevens They actually tested something like that a couple of months ago on SO, just after the experiment of 3 close votes to close a question (which is now permanent on SO). The system didn't allow the displayed vote count to drop below -1 (they also tested a lower limit of 0 for a few days). The rep calculation was unaffected, but of course 1 rep newbies can't lose rep anyway.
The main idea behind that is that newbies get discouraged by a large negative vote count and tend to abandon such questions. Also, answerers tend to not even bother reading questions withe high negative scores. A lot of SO regulars were not happy about that experiment.
@ScientistSmithYT So how do you know you achieved fusion? What fuel were you using?
 
 
3 hours later…
3:48 AM
@PM2Ring The radiation readings and Tritium is the fuel I was using. Tritium gives off a radiation signature by itself with a half life of 12.5 years. But when fusion takes place the reading of radiation changes. And a compound is formed in the diffuser chamber. If the radiation level doesnt change It's composing a different material. But both signs means fusion has been achieved.
@PM2Ring There are of course several other signs that is a by product of fusion. And I would give specifics. But my designs, engineered specs and other important documents are not exactly public nor protected. And my plans have already been stolen once And worked. So I don't want to give specifics. All I can tell you is I achieved it. And my next test which is on 1/1/2020 will demonstrate theoretically and statistically 4.5 - 5 times the power input on output.
@PM2Ring The results are becoming very very promising. But that's all for now, I've got some work to still do. But I'll respond when I can if I'm pinged.
 
 
6 hours later…
10:08 AM
0
Q: New notice banners

The Last AirbenderFrom I have found that new notice banners have started appearing on questions. Some examples are: But what was the reason for this new look? Why aren't they question closed as homework and exercise type show the specific reason? Any other relevant information are welcomed here!

 
 
4 hours later…
2:35 PM
@ACuriousMind Already done... This year 2019
@ACuriousMind Actually he's talking about Neural Genes, not the biological ones, I guess
Bye, I've to go now, I'm designing an AI to render quantum mechanics on PC
The topology of neural nets are messed up, I've to again fix them...
 
@AbhasKumarSinha I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying to make between "neural" and "biological" genes. I consider neurons to be biological.
 
2:53 PM
@JMac hello :)
 
3:04 PM
Artificial neural networks (ANN) or connectionist systems are computing systems that are inspired by, but not identical to, biological neural networks that constitute animal brains. Such systems "learn" to perform tasks by considering examples, generally without being programmed with task-specific rules. For example, in image recognition, they might learn to identify images that contain cats by analyzing example images that have been manually labeled as "cat" or "no cat" and using the results to identify cats in other images. They do this without any prior knowledge of cats, for example, that they...
@JMac It is basically an AI version of Human Brain that learns to do things itself...
example -
This one is better -
 
@AbhasKumarSinha ... What does genes have to do with that? What are "neural" genes?
 
@JMac Technique to make neural network topology to adapt itself.
 
@AbhasKumarSinha We were talking about literally grafting a new finger onto your hand. I'm almost positive he was talking about real genes, not a technique in artificial neural networks. That literally wasn't the topic at all.
 
^ this net will itself change into this \/
@JMac oh okay, I've not checked the conversation, just glanced over that neural network or genes like term...
 
@AbhasKumarSinha I'd highly suggest not trying to correct someone else when you didn't even read the context then...
 
3:11 PM
@JMac ^I also wrote about biological gene editing^ which was successfully performed this year
 
@AbhasKumarSinha That doesn't seem to be gene editing "multi cellular organisms". It sounds like they are still just testing it on single cells.
 
@JMac Red Blood Cell which is probably multicellular can also be cured that way.
 
@AbhasKumarSinha Red blood cells aren't multi-cellular.
 
@JMac I mean multicellular approach by editing single-cell RBC.
@JMac The technique is very new, may take atleast 3-4 years of work to be deployed on Multi-Cell Organisms
 
@AbhasKumarSinha But we don't know if it will actually work at all. Specifically, we don't necessarily know the effects of doing so on a living multicellular organism. I think saying it was done in 2019 is a bit dishonest since you then admit that we haven't done it yet.\
 
3:22 PM
@JMac successfully has been done
but on single cell species
 
@AbhasKumarSinha ... That's completely different then. We know that single cell organisms can be gene edited. ACM said the same. That doesn't necessarily map to easily editing multi-cellular organisms; especially controlling them to the extent talked about in the conversation.
 
@JMac See to edit multicellular organisms, we'll add edited versions of RBC(s) which with certain proteins in bone marrow may be used to produce certain cells which are capable of reproducing themselves and hence it's multicellular gene editing
@JMac There is still a long way to go to do them in a higher extent like that...
 
 
3 hours later…
6:47 PM
i need a physics joke to revitalize me
 
i've got a good joke, but it's not really physics related
 
go for it
 
How did the idiot get hurt raking leaves?
3
 
He fell out of the tree
 
6:48 PM
i don't get it?
oh
 
he was raking the tree's leaves
i'm dumb
good one tho
i think i found a twitter account with some top tier physics memes
just what i needed
 
7:05 PM
Q: Why did the chicken cross the road?
A: Fermat: It did not fit in the margin on this side.
 
 
2 hours later…
9:11 PM
31
Q: Ball hits curve of same curvature

whyI was doing some physics problems for homework and, while procrastinating, I came up with a theoretical scenario that I couldn't figure out the result of. The following is from a side view and in a frictionless, ideal environment: A ball moves toward a wall at a constant velocity. At the bottom...

I feel like this should be closed due to lack of prior research, work, etc. It is really just a positing of a homework-like question that isn't asking for understanding of any specific physics concepts.
 
 
2 hours later…
vzn
10:55 PM
lol! viva la number theory! :)
 

« first day (3319 days earlier)      last day (51 days later) »