PS

@thatdudeakshay A function that grows by 1/2^n at each interval (n, n+1/2^n) and constant everywhere else - is bounded, differentiable, and derivative does not converge to zero.

Here's one of the Most Difficult Question which was shaped when a student at CMI asked : For an increasing, differentiable and bounded function f : R → R, must it be true that limx→∞ f'(x) = 0? if this limit exists, it must be 0, bringing us to the situation in this problem I struggled with it a lot 😭

@spikedoanz Just take f(anything)=0

"hey claude, is there a thing that does f(x*y) -> f(x) + f(y) but more general than just numbers?" claude:

@SethAbramson Elon Musk does more to save humanity than any other person in recorded history. Yet here you are, trying to crucify him. History rhymes?

I just saw a post claiming that 100% of the world's trillionaires are Nazis Crazy stat if true

@ANNVYSHINSKY Small offenses: put them in stocks for 1-5 days. Medium offenses: sell at an auction. The buyer is responsible if that person ever reoffends. Major offenses: gallows.

Can someone explain what a prison abolitionist answer would actually be? Genuinely interested.

Moscow's instantly-iconic exploding fuel storage tank is resulting in a flood of memes. I'll add a selection below...

@EveKeneinan Michelle Obama is a man. This statement doesn't change the biological reality of who Michelle is, but it changes the definition of "man" to explicitly include Michelle. Anyone who has a problem with this is transphobic.

"Michelle Obama is a man." Is this true? Almost certainly not, but I think the key might be in the "almost." It isn't logically impossible that the former first lady of the United States is actually male who acts the part of a woman, that is, a trаnny — but a deeply closeted one who wants to fully pass as a woman, probably because acknowledging the truth would be personally and politically damaging to their dynasty. As I said, I think (currently) that Michelle Obama is a woman beyond reasonable doubt. But what odds would you put on this being true? 1 in 10,000? 1 in 50,000? 1 in 100,000? 1 in a million? There must be some non-zero chance that it is true. Where do YOU estimate that chance?

@ClimateWarrior7 ELON MUSK - everyone on the planet knows this name. Your Mexican toilet cleaner slave? Nobody knows her name, not even you. Of course Elon Musk should get all the pie - he DESERVES it more! Be happy he left you those crumbs.

I'll make a simple analogy that even right-wingers can understand. You make a pie. You want to give a slice of the pie to a Mexican of color who cleans your toilet, and you want to eat a slice of the pie yourself. Elon Musk comes along and takes all the pie and leaves you only with crumbs. HOW. IS. THIS. FAIR?

@TexasTamieK It's either "For fuck's sake", or "For fucks' sake", depending on how many fucks you're giving/receiving.

Quick question: is it “For fucks sake” or “For fuck sake”? I’m writing corporate, so it needs to sound professional

@Seeing_Redlines You just add a definition that for the purpose of computing "uptime" a system that doesn't exist is considered as "up".

Can someone please explain to me how to draft a legally binding addendum that alters the linear flow of time? An enterprise AE just closed a $3m deal by promising the client a custom integration that was supposed to be delivered 6 months ago. He literally wrote a retroactive SLA into the contract requiring us to have maintained a 99 percent uptime for a feature that doesn't exist yet. I asked him how he expects us to fulfill a retroactive performance guarantee without a working time machine. He suggested that legal could just draft a creative waiver to bridge the chronological gap. I'm now drafting a formal notice of dispute addressed to the space-time continuum. The CEO just messaged me to ask why I haven't approved the deal yet and if I'm letting perfect be the enemy of good. I replied that I'm letting basic physics be the enemy of wire fraud. I'm going to start chewing on my mousepad.

@elonmusk Anger is an emotion, but also an opinion. Freedom to have and express your opinions is protected by the 1st Amendment.

Murderous migrants beheading innocent people in their home town is what’s making people angry, not “social media”!

@gothichijabi A person can always go to a min. wage job for $15/hr which is $30k/year. This is not poverty. They can also choose not to work -- which means they value their life of idleness more than $30k/year. In either case they are not poor.

ngl a lot of people do make straight up fanfiction about the US. last year i was arguing w two guys in buenos aires at 5am in front of a mcdonald’s trying to explain to them that the US has extreme poverty

@RichardHanania At mean iq 100, people with 110+ are roughly 30% of population. Do you really want 1B indians + Chinese into the country? Because at that point the US will basically cease to exist as we know it.

How you know the race and IQ people are just bigots: if you take IQ seriously, your main cause should be getting everyone on earth with a 110 IQ or higher into your country. This would be the only logical position one can hold. But that's not what these people support!

@DVanLangenhove But hate is not a crime. Hate is an opinion, protected under the freedom of speech principles, enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Not really. Sharing any meme that includes Adolf Hitler in a private (!) group chat is considered a hate crime against Jewish people. I got a year in jail. Smashing statues of Jesus and Mary on public television and encouraging people to do the same “as a form of stress relief” was not considered a hate crime against Christian people. Stark, isn’t it?

@KuroSekaiAnime I know you wish to save humanity, and it's good. But. What if less than 50% vote blue? Then you die, and all those who heed your words and follow you - they also die. With some probability you are PERSONALLY responsible for the death of many people. Are you a good person still?

Let me break this down >People will press blue >its inevitable >Pushing red sacrifices these people but saves you >clicking blue saves everyone with risk > 50% is a small requirement > So as many people as possible should press blue to save everyone > clicking red is selfish

@plasmarob 90% of people live in 3rd world countries. I predict that they'll overwhelmingly choose red out of self-interest. You cannot outvote them. Therefore, choosing blue is a suicide. The moral choice is to not kill yourself, and also to try persuade others to not kill themselves.

Can somebody who is still voting red explain their position to me without getting mad? (Preferably without saying I am mad, actually) I still don't get it

@VoicesUnheard @BasedSamParker I think it's great news. If Ford holds this patent, then Tesla can't add this technology - because Ford holds the patent.

DYSTOPIAN doesn't even begin to cover it. You'll want to sit down for this one.. hopefully it's not in your new black mirror vehicle. 👇 In new patents filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office (Serial No. 20250104469), Ford is envisioning a future where your pickup turns into a rolling police station. And we don’t mean just a bunch of new safety features; the new patents envision your truck as a 24/7 surveillance outpost. 👁️ Biometric Checks: From the comfort of your own driveway, your eyes will be scanned, and that iris and fingerprint checked against a database of criminals - real-time results received within seconds. 🧠 Did you know? Your car can put you in an Emotional Lockout! If your vehicle senses that you are in a “panic” driving state or have the “big eyes” (unintentionally locking onto an object for too long), the vehicle will determine that you are not fit to drive. The vehicle will remain in a Park state and will not allow the shifter to transition into the Drive state. 👂 Ad Spying – using acoustic waves to read your lips and display monitored conversations to you in order to serve you targeted ads for maximum monetization. 🚔 Law Enforcement: The live feeds in the footages "by Ford" are not encrypted and thus can be used for Law Enforcement Integration. Ford's own patent language for this feature describes the live feeds as "potentially useful for police". This isn't "coming soon" - it's already here. • Smart Eye monitoring software is already in use in over 4 million vehicles worldwide. • To comply with EU regulations such as the Future Truck 2025 concept, GSR, drowsiness system will be a mandatory feature on board. • Ford currently offers live in-cabin Ford Pro Telematics feeds to its fleet manager customers. The future is looking more like a world where you pay for your name and reputation , but everyone else profits off of your private information and influence. Surveillance society: It’s not just the new spying tech that’s the problem - it’s that all older vehicles are being gradually driven off the road and taken out of commission through legislation and a parts shortage, leaving drivers with a hollow choice. All is not lost. But we’re not just losing privacy. We’re losing the concept of an exit ramp. How long do you plan to keep your "analog" car on the road?

@CinemaWinner Everyone picked red but one person picked blue. If you choose red, that person dies. If you choose blue, that person also dies, but you die as well. Why do you think the second option is better?

It’s simple to me. If you believe 100% of people will pick red, pick red. If you believe even 1 person will pick blue, you should pick blue. I think >50% will know the second is the actual reality and they’ll pick blue.

@sauczsa Someone next to you parked badly, they gave him a card, then he moved the card to your windshield, because he's an a**hole, of course.

What’s wrong with my parking :(..

@questionableway You choose blue because you want to save everyone. That's understandable. But the majority of people around the world are not prone to self-sacrifice, they'll choose red. You will die, despite the noble effort.

red is an unbelievably phenomenally disgustingly selfish decision and i do not have theory of mind for anyone who would choose it

@theblessedsalt You're missing an important aspect here: This approach protects not only this particular mailbox, but also every other mailbox in the US. It certainly does more good than harm.

This post is an excellent litmus test for understanding of just war theory. Despite the fact that I can see how effective this would be, I must oppose it because the damage it would do to my enemy (who bashes in my mailbox) would far outweigh the good of saving my mailbox. Its disproportionality is opposed by our duty in charity (and even justice) to watch out even for the good of our enemies. (Yes, by the way, I have had my mailbox bashed in by random vandals.)