[–] 1 point 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I am Guilty.

Well we'll see what kind of writing takes priority, my brainspam, or your interests in proper literature.

I've had a random thought today: if im ever interviewed on Japanese news, I will say in somewhat broken English: I'm a secret Korean. (like Kennedy sayd "Ich bin ein Berliner") but a) it makes no sense, b) Its hilarious because some japanese are scared of and very hateful to "secret koreans" infiltrating their society and I am c) absolutely not remotely Asian-looking and d) roasting the fuck out of their racist stereotypes.

Now how can I get onto Japanese news.

Also Lemmy seems to be crapping the bed right now.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago

    Witness for the Prosecution (1957) Anatomy of a Murder (1959) Inherit the Wind (1960) Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) My Cousin Vinny (1992): "It’s a comedy, but it’s often cited by actual lawyers as the most accurate trial movie ever made." Primal Fear (1996) Just Mercy (2019)

    • Claude

    It seems like there can be one of these every year for a certain period. And while we're at it there also seems to be a weird trend about blacks and freedom in the southern us and the colour green in their titles: The Green Mile and Green Book for example. wouldn't know why.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago*

    It worked

    Gimp is miserable to use. I just wanted to put a drop-shadow like on all the Impact-font-memes, but nooo thats so complicated you'll have to do this 8-step tutorial, but step 3 doesnt exist anymore. Or you do this 3 step tutorial but the result is crap (its actually quite good, henry went from unreadable to perfectly chromulent.)

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago (1 child)

    Dont tempt me with a good time. Actually no, I'll not do that. I was never really on board with Harry Potter and you know the meme of "when something you hate for no reason turns out to be ___" Thats basically me with many things. The Prejudices I carry for fun somehow turn out to be true surprisingly often. I dont know what that says about me or the universe, but I'll feel good about myself in the meantime.

    But if you were to want to read a great book in a similar vein to Harry Potter about a magic boy going to magic school, then I suggest you find and read the Tapestry by Henry Neff. (I read the german translation which is as a translation 7/10 and doesnt have part 4 and 5 so now I looking it up im basically getting spoilered left and right.)

    But the story is way cool and hits waaaay different than Harry Potter. there is like SO much stuff happening. and it reads easy and its fun and also a bit of a power fantasy, which is absolutelly still my guilty pleasure of reading interest. But it is also very different than Harry Potter. Also the author is not in any controversy, not that I, a certified non-american would care about Mold-Lady besides that it is funny. The only trouble I have is that I cannot describe it easily without invoking the power of the HP.

    I really need to get onto creating this meme Only I know of. Wait! I can just do it now, I do have a GIMP in my PC.

    Welp dont know if that worked, but basically its a picture of a Sphenodon (only surviving species of a sister branch (from back in the Trias) to lizards, so decidedly not a lizard) with text saying "you're a Lizard, Henry". I dont need to explain further.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago

    I found this weird catboy who apparently studied business on YouTube who does Essays. And his Bobby-Broccoli & Jon Bois styled video on how IMDB ratings and such work is great. You may have been forced to look at his thumbnail of a video about chess, where the title is something like one of these two players is going to die and the thumbnail is two people sitting at a chess board with big bold red text "draws do not count". Watch that, its great.

    Draws do not count: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMfGGcUzDRE

    You do not want another Episode of your favourite series (remastered): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wka48VweZBA

    Also I have a very comprehensive, simple and especially informative rating system: I Compare things to my expectations, score from 1 to 10 and my score actually means something. because many americans are like: there was a rat in my food 1/10. The food was terrible 8/10. The food was just alright 9/10, the food was great! 10/10. Boah the food was amazing 11/10 I've never had anything this good in my life! 12/10 What??? you've got this whole scale and you're crunching everything into this tiny space and then you eed to break your own scale just to say something.

    I posted this under an aproriate video about rating systems:

    this is what we actually want. this is what we need:

    1 Hated.

    2: Actively unpleasant.

    3: Poor, with major problems.

    5: Acceptable and unremarkable. Around average, to be expected.

    7: Clearly good.

    9: Exceptional.

    10: Basically perfect for its purpose or personal favourite.

    We do not need an understanding and comparison to everything ever like with systems that are supposedly perfectly symmetrical or something.

    Anyway 11/10 video.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago

    Sorry about the mosquitos. I sent them to your home as a prank.

    Ah I knew it, it was you. Gotta write that down in my big book of Grudges...

    see 36 notifs

    Sorry about that.

    At this point i did not know of your recent Jazzy Adventures.

    Why are you so averse, so prejudiced against the simple pleasures of human chess?

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    well I've cought up with this part of your life, i may have missed some pants-news somewhen in-between, though it was a very interesting ride for the last while. am now gonna try and sleep or something.

    Or I'm gonna listen some more to Frank Zappa's Apostrophe.

    Good night to you, or good morning. If you want, say greetings to yo gal from me. Sorry for the wall of messages i left on your board anyways. Didnt want to stop the last month, and before that i was basically just going through, catching up.

    Saddle the chickens, we're riding to Texas!

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    the important thing is what you are feeling. not what you think you should be, but what you actually are. also try sometimes to view yourself through your girl's view. you may be surprised.

    if that is hard for you, ask her to describe you, she may do that gladly, as she seems to like you that way. and when she does, listen closely and pay attention.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    Well congratulations to you, for achieving girlfriend. congratulations to me for predicting these things 100% of the time. definetly. am never wrong.

    Did you see it coming? i saw it from miles away, like a train honking. Though at some point the honkadonking may start. I'll look away then, dont worry...

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago

    Basically communication is mind-reading. the trouble is some peoples minds are organized. you know that every organization system is different. others arent organized. some are neat. many are absolutely chaotic. many are slower or faster than you. But often only in some "disciplines"

    How could you expect of others to just read your mind? for there to be anything to read you need to expose things.

    from experience i can say it to be quite uninteresting to hang with people you can predict perfectly. what use are they to me? i cant have any productive discussion, they'll just answer as they have in my head. So the only use they have is for information storage. sadly that person didnt have that great a memory capacity for anything useful to me. (im not interested in macroscale electronics)

  • source
  •  

    Everyone had this broblem once: you've used something, now it's broken.

    Or: You've killed someone and now they're dead.

    Or: Youve bought something wrapped in plastic now you have useless plastic scraps.

    Introducing the new solution: Garbage collection!

    We just need investment, then we will begin to collect all of the waste of all humans, then we will store it, for free! And once it is proven to work for, maybe a week, we will blitzscale through *north america, europe, africa and asia!

    We will collect all garbage, drive it to cheap land near the amazon, qnd store it there, protecting the forest from deforestation in the meanthyme! When we have scaled enough and people have stopped doing with their waste what they previously would have, we can introduce a new concept: tourism on trash mountain!

    This tourism will be our long-term plan to profitability, we just need xxxTrillion $¥¢£ (DollarYenCentPound).

    (Edit: the following has been changed: the americas --> North america, South america Is the Dump, not a place we collect garbage from, that would be unreasonable.

    What stayed the same: the terrible spelling of blitz-scaling and other things.)

     

    We replace some characters with a common character, so we don't have as many of them. Basically: merging.

    I recomnend: a&e, o&u, y&i for "vowels" r&l, n&m, b&d, f&s, w&t, p&c for consonants.

    This will help streamlining the english language.

    Example text, where letter pairs are merged into the first of the two: (The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog) Wha qoypk brown fox junpf ovar wha razy bog.

    (Supercalifragilisticexpiallygocious) Foparcaryfragyryfwypaxpyarrygopioof

    (Much better) Noch bawwar

     

    This post is a personal rant

    They have written:

    Spotify Secures Direct Licensing Deal with Kobalt

    Spotify has entered into a direct licensing deal with Kobalt, the companies announced on Wednesday, the latest of several music publishing deals the streaming service has secured in 2025.

    Spotify and Kobalt were light on details in their brief announcement, only confirming the deal is a multi-year agreement and that it would "deliver greater flexibility, efficiency, value, and protections to songwriters in the U.S.

    "As the largest independent music publisher dedicated to fighting for the rights of songwriters, this deal reaffirms our unwavering commitment to ensuring our songwriters are paid fairly for their work, and underscores the importance of progressive licensing models that reflect the real-world use of music across digital platforms," Kobalt CEO Laurent Hubert said in a statement. "This partnership is a step in the right direction, and we look forward to continuing to work with Spotify to increase the value of songwriter royalties."

    The deal with Kobalt follows Spotify's previously announced deals with Universal Music Group and its UMPG subsidiary back in January, and a subsequent deal with Warner Music Group and Warner Chappell back in February.

    The licensing deals are of note given that the music publishers and Spotify have been at odds since last year over a controversial audiobook bundling strategy from Spotify that's lead to lower songwriter royalties. The National Music Publishers Association said at its annual meeting back in June that publishers lost $230 million last year because of the bundles. Spotify said in its Loud and Clear report back in March that it's paid $4.5 billion to songwriters and publishers in the past two years.

    We've always believed that better partnerships lead to better outcomes," Spotify's co-president and chief business officer Alex Norström said in a statement. "This agreement with Kobalt boosts our support of songwriters through a licensing model that unlocks new growth and will expand the way music is made and shared today."

    More from The Hollywood Reporter

    Daryl Hall and John Oates Legal Dispute Ends in Arbitration Demi Lovato Says Reuniting With Jonas Brothers and Performing 'Camp Rock' Songs Was "Healing"

    ~ 13th August ¹2025


    I have searched for Spotify, then the first article in my search results jumps out at me: "Spotify Secures Direct Licensing Deal with Kobalt" The have a cool Picture with a Spotify logo on it. I am somewhat interested. What is cobalt, I click. I have an ad-blocker so nothing weird happens. But then I start to read the Article. My eyes start to glaze over. Now I still don't know WHAT IN THE WORLD Kobalt is. And it doesnt even interest me anymore. Why do they make an article about "thing" and not tell the reader what it even is?

    This Post is not about Kobalt, I do, because of this article, not know what that is. I do know what the article is. The article is pure crap. Thanks internet.

    Basically I am left near speechless, because it is just so bad, completely useless. Incompetent beyond measurement.


    Using Claude Sonnet 4: I have found an article claiming that spotify and Kobalt have made an agreement. What is Kobalt?

    It answers (beware, it cannot cite shit):

    Kobalt is an independent rights management and music publishing company founded in 2000 by Swedish entrepreneur Willard Ahdritz [Wikipedia] [Music Business Worldwide]. Think of it as the middleman who stands between songwriters and the streaming platforms — but unlike traditional publishers who buy your recipe outright, Kobalt lets creators keep ownership of their copyrights [Kobalt Music Group - Music Business Worldwide] while handling the complex business of collecting royalties.

    As of 2015, Kobalt was the top independent music publisher in the UK and second overall in the US [Kobalt Music Group - Wikipedia] representing over 850,000 songs from major artists including Roddy Ricch, Max Martin, Paul McCartney, and Phoebe Bridgers [Kobalt Music Group Announces Transactions to Increase Funding Capacity to More than $1 Billion]. On average, they represent over 35% of the top 100 songs and albums in both the US and UK.

    The Spotify deal announced today is part of a broader trend. This new multiyear direct licensing agreement aims to deliver greater flexibility, efficiency, value, and protections to songwriters in the US [Spotify For the Record The Hollywood Reporter]. Spotify has also struck similar direct deals with Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group [Billboard - Music Business Worldwide], essentially bypassing the standard industry royalty structure to potentially pay songwriters more.

    These private deals override the statutory Copyright Royalty Board rules, improving mechanical royalty payments [Kobalt inks direct licensing deal with Spotify in the US - Music Business Worldwide] — which matters because Spotify had been embroiled in legal disputes over underpaying songwriters through a controversial bundling classification of their premium service.

    Praised be the Programmers that can not be held accountable for the bullshit posted on their architecture.

     

    Personal Preamble: I really thought, this community was gone somewhen in spring, but looky-loo, I found it again. Even though I made the thing and I am the admin, I still lost it... Welp now I can try to beat this dead horse further.

    Introduction: What I am talking about today is how utterly terrible the standarts are in physics. Keep in mind, that I am not a professional physicist at all and am mostly talking as someone who is very disappointed.

    So what I did a year ago, was to collect a bunch of important Equations and write them down, then I took the Symbols out of the equations and wrote them as a concise list of Symbols, their names, their Physical measurements and such. It was basically a project done, to prove a point. It proves it's point still, but that helps little if its just on my hard-drive.

    Now I took out the project again and threw it into the LLM called Claude Sonnet 4. And after a bit of fiddling we have this:

    Physical Quantities and Units

    SI Base Units

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol
    Length l, s, r, x, y, z Meter m
    Mass m Kilogram kg
    Time t Second s
    Electric Current I Ampere A
    Thermodynamic Temperature T Kelvin K
    Amount of Substance n Mole mol
    Luminous Intensity I_v Candela cd

    Mechanics/Dynamics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Velocity v m/s v = s/t
    Acceleration a m/s² a = v/t, a = F/m
    Force F Newton N [kg⋅m/s²], F = ma
    Momentum p kg⋅m/s p = mv
    Work, Energy W, E Joule J [N⋅m = kg⋅m²/s²], W = F⋅s
    Power P Watt W [J/s = kg⋅m²/s³], P = W/t
    Angle α, β, φ, θ Radian rad
    Angular Velocity ω rad/s ω = φ/t, v = ωr
    Angular Acceleration α rad/s² α = ω/t
    Solid Angle Ω Steradian sr
    Moment of Inertia I, J, Θ kg⋅m²
    Torque M N⋅m M = F⋅r
    Angular Momentum L kg⋅m²/s L = Iω
    Spring Constant D, k N/m F = -kx
    Coefficient of Friction μ dimensionless F_R = μN
    Centripetal Force N F = mv²/r
    Gravitational Force N F = Gm₁m₂/r²

    Thermodynamics/Heat

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Temperature T Kelvin K (-273.15°C = 0 K)
    Internal Energy U Joule J
    Heat Q Joule J
    Entropy S J/K
    Specific Heat Capacity c J/(kg⋅K) Q = mcΔT
    Heat Capacity C J/K
    Thermal Conductivity λ, κ W/(m⋅K)
    Coefficient of Thermal Expansion α 1/K Δl = αl₀ΔT
    Universal Gas Constant R J/(mol⋅K) pV = nRT
    Boltzmann Constant k_B J/K
    Stefan-Boltzmann Law W/m² j = σT⁴

    Fluid Mechanics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Density ρ kg/m³ ρ = m/V
    Pressure p Pascal Pa [N/m² = kg/(m⋅s²)], p = F/A
    Volume V m³
    Area A m²
    Flow Velocity v m/s
    Dynamic Viscosity η Pa⋅s [N⋅s/m²]
    Kinematic Viscosity ν m²/s ν = η/ρ
    Continuity Equation ρ₁v₁A₁ = ρ₂v₂A₂
    Bernoulli Equation p + ½ρv² + ρgh = const

    Electrostatics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Electric Charge Q, q Coulomb C [A⋅s]
    Electric Voltage U Volt V [W/A = kg⋅m²/(A⋅s³)]
    Electric Potential φ, V Volt V U = φ₁ - φ₂
    Electric Field Strength E V/m [N/C], E = F/q
    Electric Flux Density D C/m²
    Capacitance C Farad F [C/V = A⋅s/V], Q = CU
    Permittivity ε F/m
    Relative Permittivity ε_r dimensionless
    Coulomb's Law F = kq₁q₂/r²

    Electrodynamics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Electric Current I Ampere A I = Q/t
    Current Density J, j A/m² J = I/A
    Electric Resistance R Ohm Ω [V/A], U = IR
    Electric Conductance G Siemens S [1/Ω], G = 1/R
    Resistivity ρ Ω⋅m R = ρl/A
    Magnetic Flux Density B Tesla T [Wb/m² = kg/(A⋅s²)]
    Magnetic Field Strength H A/m
    Magnetic Flux Φ Weber Wb [V⋅s = kg⋅m²/(A⋅s²)]
    Inductance L Henry H [Wb/A = kg⋅m²/(A²⋅s²)]
    Permeability μ H/m
    Lorentz Force N F = q(E + v×B)
    Faraday's Law U_ind = -dΦ/dt

    Oscillations and Waves

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Frequency f, ν Hertz Hz [1/s], f = 1/T
    Period T s T = 1/f
    Angular Frequency ω rad/s ω = 2πf
    Wavelength λ m
    Wave Velocity c, v m/s c = fλ
    Amplitude A m
    Phase Angle φ, Φ Radian rad
    Damping Coefficient β, γ 1/s
    Harmonic Oscillation x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

    Acoustics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Speed of Sound c m/s c = fλ
    Sound Pressure Level L_p Decibel dB L_p = 20 log(p/p₀)
    Sound Intensity I W/m²
    Acoustic Impedance Z Pa⋅s/m Z = ρc
    Doppler Effect f' = f(v±v_observer)/(v±v_source)

    Optics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Speed of Light c m/s c = fλ
    Refractive Index n dimensionless n = c₀/c
    Focal Length f m
    Optical Power D Diopter dpt [1/m], D = 1/f
    Object Distance g m
    Image Distance b m
    Luminous Flux Φ_v Lumen lm [cd⋅sr]
    Illuminance E_v Lux lx [lm/m² = cd⋅sr/m²]
    Luminance L_v cd/m²
    Lens Equation 1/f = 1/g + 1/b
    Snell's Law n₁sin(α₁) = n₂sin(α₂)

    Atomic and Nuclear Physics

    Physical Quantity Symbol Unit Unit Symbol Derivation/Equation
    Energy E Joule, Electron Volt J, eV 1 eV = 1.602×10⁻¹⁹ J
    Photon Energy E_ph Electron Volt eV E = hf = ħω
    De Broglie Wavelength λ_dB m λ = h/p
    Compton Wavelength λ_C m λ_C = h/(m_e c)
    Rest Energy E_0 eV, J E₀ = mc²
    Binding Energy B.E. eV, MeV
    Planck Constant h J⋅s 6.626×10⁻³⁴ J⋅s
    Reduced Planck Constant ħ J⋅s h/(2π)
    Number of Particles N dimensionless
    Activity A Becquerel Bq [1/s], A = λN
    Decay Constant λ 1/s N(t) = N₀e^(-λt)
    Half-life t_{1/2} s t_{1/2} = ln(2)/λ
    Cross Section σ Barn b [10⁻²⁴ cm²]
    Atomic Mass Unit m Atomic Mass Unit u 1 u = 1.661×10⁻²⁷ kg
    Bohr Radius a₀ m 5.292×10⁻¹¹ m
    Rydberg Energy Ry eV 13.61 eV
    Photoelectric Effect E_kin = hf - W

    Important Constants

    Constant Symbol Value Unit
    Speed of Light c 2.998×10⁸ m/s
    Planck Constant h 6.626×10⁻³⁴ J⋅s
    Elementary Charge e 1.602×10⁻¹⁹ C
    Electron Mass m_e 9.109×10⁻³¹ kg
    Proton Mass m_p 1.673×10⁻²⁷ kg
    Avogadro Constant N_A 6.022×10²³ 1/mol

    It worked! Praised be the programming gods! One thing that is technically lacking is the Little vector-indication-arrow above F for Force, B for magnetic field... but that is a problem of the LLM.

    Now that we all see the same thing in front of our peepers, I can properly begin to criticice the whole thing, but only after giving context and orientation. It always drives me nuts when someone introduces a complicated graph and doesn't give people the information or the thyme to understand it. (Like a simple explanation of what is where on a graph can already significantly help in introducing people to the thing that is being talked about but no, the thyme is apparently running out or something and we'd be much better of, with having just glanced at the best method of getting the information to the brain instead of actually analyzing it.)

    Even though you probably have enough thyme to analyze it yourself, I will still give you a rundown of the system. Context: This is all completelly settled science, this is basically "modern" Physics, in the sense that modern was the early 20th century. We have no Computers, no Quantum Mechanics, just basic physics. It actually is a list capable of solving nearly any simple engineering problem you may encounter! Well not really. If you want to disprove all of science, any of these mathematical statements are a good start, since they have been baked in deeply. Conversely it is incredibly difficult to actually disprove any of it to a rigorous degree. It's as proven as it can get in science, with the caveat that there absolutely still is more to say about any topic, but the principle is correct, just somewhere there are little details.

    If you ever find yourself in a situation where you'd need quantum Physics or transistor knowledge, then you probably also have studied it for a while in uni and this place is not the place you should get your information about these topics from, yes?

    This also means, that all of the confusion I will later unearth, has been happening exactly like this for 100 years and has not been fixed, so either I am seeing a problem others are ignoring, or I see a solution others haven't seen yet.

    Explanation/Orientation: We have the Mathemagical representation, symbol, of the physical world, a "model" so to say, on the left side. Typically there is some Name for a Phenomena and there is a Letter ascribed to it, fairly arbitrairaly. On the Other side we have the thing you can touch and measure. The meter for example. These are often somewhat connected to the name of the person who did some thinking about it in years yonder. Like the measurable force-unid is called Newton. Oftenthymes someone will do a calculation only with the "models", then they will introduce the measurements, shorten all the units and, if they did it right, they end up with another meausurement-unit (like m/s).

    I don't quite understand, why that step of abstraction is necessary, I do however know the it creates confusion. Here are some criticisms and rocommendations I have:

    • The Symbols are ill-related to the referential Topics.
    • A better approach, at least for constants, would be something like a common letter (c, for constant), then a subscript for which it concerns itself with. (c_Boltzmann, c_Lightspeed, c_EarthGravityApprox, c_Spring, etc.)
    • You currently see a letter in an equation (v, q, d, k, s, t, σ, ρ, λ, ...) and you do not know where it belongs or what it is trying to say, this is inefficient and a problem.
    • This could partially be alleviated by ALWAYS writing, for example all physical measurements and their direct calculations inside a [ ] like so: [N = m/s² * kg]. Here you see that the ambiguous letters, through the context of the surrounding brackets. You know its not mass/square_distance or something like that, but the SI-units or other standart units being used to express a physical thing that could happen in the real world.
    • Capacitance, Symbol C, Unit F (Farad); Electric Charge, Symbol Q, Unit C (Coulomb). IF THESE APPEAR ON THE SAME PAGE I AM GOING TO CONFUSE THEM.
    • Permeability is just a mess.
    • Whats often written as a V? Volume, Voltage, Volt, Velocity...
    • Some of the greek Letters end up being very confusing and easy to confuse with each other. What are ξ and ζ? and why do they look like someone squished a ω onto my papers when I write one of those by hand?
    • WHY are there 4 different Deltas with very similar, but I am assured they are different, meanings? Δ, δ, ∂ and d! Four! and they all mean something different aparently? but they also all are just the non-capital letter Delta? Madness.
    • There appears to be no trying to unify and standardize these things! Newton would use ẋ, Leibniz dx/dt, another ∂x/∂t, or even x'
    • exponentials: exp(x), e^x, e², 10², 10^2...
    • Bad use of an exclamation mark after a number like 80! is such a big number, i doubt you've meant what you've written but what about 10! or 5! ? how would one know whether they just wanted to emphasize the number or use the factorial?
    • not knowing how exponentials work, like two data points CANNOT be exponential, you neeed at leat three of them to begin describing an exponential growth, decay... It is somewhat infuriating, but in the end not that important.
    • Complex numbers. Whats the letter to use? it i, no question, yes? oh if it werent a question, then why is it on the list???
    • Degrees, Radian, Gon, π, Sterradian, all are used for the "same" thing, describing how far a circle is along its circleness.
    • Sinus, Cosinus, Tangens. Nobody understands them.
    • π vs τ
    • You could make an iceberg out of this list
    • there is Redshift z, but also Redshift Δλ/λ
    • The Hubble constant is not constant, which would be excusable if it werent named constant but like... something with simultanious? Simult? Simconstant? Meanst? its the same everywhere now, but changes over thyme, so we call it by one simple new name, to differentiate it from true constants, which we suspect to be unchangable.
    • Positions in coordinate systems. Computers count up, when they move down similarily in a matrix or a data set, but in physical space, usually x is along, but it can also be to go vertical.
    • Energy is a mess there are Joule, Kalorie, eV, kWh, BTU... Then there are the cursed units lik KW/h/Year...
    • EVERYTHING JUST GETS WORSE WHEN YOU TALK TO AN AMERICAN! They have their "intuitive" units, but the more abstracted meters have the advantage of being simpler to calculate with and being more definitevely defined.
    • How do you write vectors? we but an arrow above it, but others write them in bold, or underline them...
    • Any standaartization in the field of phyiscs also has to adhere to standarts that are further along, like in the field of chemistry, where they have actual international agencies that do stuff and it reaches even students in normal schools.

    There are some standartization agencies and commities, but obviously there has yet to be any success in merging the whole system into a coherent whole.

    Ultimately what is needed is some discipline by everyone to adhere to the correct units and then we maybe could actually advance.

    Here are two videos by Joseph Newton about cursed units, for those interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkfIXUjkYqE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg7xe8MkJHs

    Have a good day, and praise the programmers, that build upon layer and layer of magic and don't need to concern themselves with the lower levels of the simulation.

    view more: next ›