pglpm

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Cheers! Got a bit clearer now.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Appreciated if someone can explain what is the problem and its context in simple terms 🙏

I understand the GNU "framework" is built on free, open source software. So I don't understand how one can "discover" that there were pieces of non-free software there... They were put there by mistake?

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The current security philosophy almost seems to be: "In order to make it secure, make it difficult to use". This is why I propose to go a step further: "In order to make it secure, just don't make it". The safest account is the one that doesn't exist or that can't be accessed by anyone, including its owner.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Just wanted to applaud the fact that you've come here asking people, rather than asking some large language model.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We aren't supposed to accept that. We can simply not use their software. And as users that's the only power we have on devs. But it's a power that only works on devs who are interested in having many users.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Nobel prize in computer science. Looks like the Nobel Prize committee has forgotten what Physics is.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

Well done! 💪🚀

This reminds me: what kind of Youtube replacement or quasi-replacement in the Fediverse? I've heard that Peertube may be difficult to maintain long term, which makes sense...

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This is a fascinating phenomenon – but fully within current theory. And there's no "inversion of the arrow of time", despite what the sensationalistic, misleading title seems to imply. From the recent paper (my emphasis):

Our results, over a range of pulse durations and optical depths, are consistent with the recent theoretical prediction that the mean atomic excitation time caused by a transmitted photon (as measured via the time integral of the observed phase shift) equals the group delay experienced by the light.

The theoretical explanation is given in this paper:

We examine this problem using the weak-value formalism and show that the time a transmitted photon spends as an atomic excitation is equal to the group delay, which can take on positive or negative values.

It is essentially related to the difference between phase and group velocity of waves.

One more example of how nature – as we currently understand it – offers amazing, fascinating, unexpected phenomena. It doesn't need misleading sensationalism.

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

Fully agree.

It's worth posting the blog post you linked.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/29254007

https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/academic-journals/

"On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis, Sage, Wiley, and Wolters Kluwer, on behalf of a proposed class of scientists and scholars who provided manuscripts or peer review, alleging that these publishers conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research."

 

https://www.lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/academic-journals/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2024/09/16/scientists-file-antitrust-lawsuit-against-six-journal-publishers/

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/academic-publishers-face-class-action-over-peer-review-pay-other-restrictions-2024-09-13/

"On September 12, 2024, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel at Justice Catalyst Law filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against six commercial publishers of academic journals, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis, Sage, Wiley, and Wolters Kluwer, on behalf of a proposed class of scientists and scholars who provided manuscripts or peer review, alleging that these publishers conspired to unlawfully appropriate billions of dollars that would otherwise have funded scientific research."

"Deutsche Bank aptly describes the Scheme as a “bizarre” “triple pay system” whereby “the state funds most of the research, pays the salaries of most of those checking the quality of the research, and then buys most of the published product.”"

[–] pglpm@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Personally I disagree on value of sex/nude scenes – but it's a subjective matter of course. Your final argument is absolutely fair and logical, and very general too. Extremely well put – I subscribe 110% to it!

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/27749197

I've been trying to use Matrix to replace sites like Discord or Slack. But it seems that if a user creates an invitation-only room in a server, then invited users who are registered on other servers get errors when trying to join. Not very useful error messages either: "Failed to join room". (In my case, I tried creating accounts and rooms at nitro.chat and then at converser.eu, but friends registered at matrix.org don't manage to join).

Quite a let-down. Anyone who's facing the same problem and has maybe managed to solve it?

88
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by pglpm@lemmy.ca to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
 

I've been trying to use Matrix to replace sites like Discord or Slack. But it seems that if a user creates an invitation-only room in a server, then invited users who are registered on other servers get errors when trying to join. Not very useful error messages either: "Failed to join room". (In my case, I tried creating accounts and rooms at nitro.chat and then at converser.eu, but friends registered at matrix.org don't manage to join).

Quite a let-down. Anyone who's facing the same problem and has maybe managed to solve it?

 

Doesn't CrowdStrike have more important things to do right now than try to take down a parody site?

That's what IT consultant David Senk wondered when CrowdStrike sent a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notice targeting his parody site ClownStrike.

Senk created ClownStrike in the aftermath of the largest IT outage the world has ever seen—which CrowdStrike blamed on a buggy security update that shut down systems and incited prolonged chaos in airports, hospitals, and businesses worldwide....

 

A new pack of pure Awesomeness is hopefully arriving soon...

1
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by pglpm@lemmy.ca to c/generalrelativity@mander.xyz
 

I was reading some works – true pearls! – by Synge: his conference contribution Tensorial integral conservation laws in general relativity (1959/1962) and his book Relativity: The General Theory (1960). In these works Synge introduces an extremely interesting definition of four-momentum and of rotational momentum, based on two-point tensors. The definition is interesting because (1) it involves the full Riemann tensor, not just the Einstein tensor, (2) it includes the (or rather, defines a) four-momentum and rotational momentum of the gravitational field, (3) it obeys a conservation law as opposed to a balance law (the equation ∇⋅T=0 expresses in general just balance, not conservation).

The definition for rotational momentum is also interesting because it appears as the natural generalization of the one in Newtonian mechanics, which is based on the affine structure of its 3D space. Roughly speaking, in Newtonian mechanics we have (r-a)∧p, where a is a fixed point, r the point of interest, and p the momentum (density) at the point r. Synge essentially replaces the difference "r-a", which relies on an affine structure, with the geodesic distance between two points R and A in spacetime, through his two-point "world function". In his book he explains that general relativity requires the appearance of a reference point (a or A) also in the definition of four-momentum, whereas such reference point is superfluous in Newtonian mechanics.

OK this was a very poor summary, just to pique your interest. For details see Synge's conference contribution, and chapter VI, especially §4, of his book (refs below).

Bryce DeWitt even commented "Je suis tout à fait de l'avis du professeur Synge qui insiste sur le fait que ces fonctions de deux points se montreront très importantes dans le futur développement de la théorie de la relativité générale" on the conference contribution. Two-point tensors were quite fashionable in the 1960s, they are used in interesting ways also in Truesdell & Toupin's The Classical Field Theories (see Part F and Appendix III there).

Yet, these definition venues seem to have been abandoned today. Here are my questions to you: why? just for unfathomable sociology-of-science reasons, or because of physical-mathematical ones? Are there works today which further explore these venues?

References:

• Synge: Tensorial integral conservation laws in general relativity, in Lichnerowicz,Tonnelat: Les théories relativistes de la gravitation (CNRS 1962), pp. 75–83. https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=74345AB69DDF9EE233FA55F55FDCB057

• Synge: Relativity: The General Theory (North-Holland 1960). https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=7AE08880CF8086FED4D3BCF732BE8E54

• Truesdell, Toupin: The Classical Field Theories, in Flügge: Handbuch der Physik: III/1 (Springer 1960), pp. I–VII, 226–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45943-6_2 https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=728F54156B632C44EAC2C559F120DDAB

1
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by pglpm@lemmy.ca to c/bayes@mander.xyz
 

A little advertisement for a new free online course about the foundations of data science, machine learning, and – just a little – artificial intelligence. It's been designed for students in computer science and data science, who could be uncomfortable with a head-on probability-theory or statistics approach, and who might have a lighter background in maths. The main point of view of the course is how to build an artificial-intelligence agent who must draw inferences and make decisions. As a course, it's still a sort of experiment.

https://pglpm.github.io/ADA511/

In more technical terms, the course is actually about so-called "Bayesian nonparametric density inference" and Bayesian decision theory.

 

Can't help imagining Saitama putting a definite end, without so much back-and-forth, to Mahito's hateful smirk. One punch is all that's needed.

 

What are the comparative and superlative of the adjective "fun"? I'd say "more fun" and "most fun"...

But I'm somehow slightly tempted by "funnier" and "funniest", which should be for "funny" though, not "fun"...

I didn't find anything about this in the main dictionaries.

view more: next ›