Removed by mod
“do it again, I wasn’t looking”
Removed by mod
Right, I thought that might be what you were referring to. This is where we get into weeds technically:
Those regulations apply to active jamming, which is the use of an electronic device(s) to emit signals that interfere with lawfully approved channels. It is important to note that this holds no practical bearing upon structures as they by definition cannot engage in active jamming, only in passive blocking or coincidental interference.
What’s being experienced with Walmart’s lack of 5G is likely due to the fact that 5G does not penetrate walls very well. Combine this with the fact that you have hundreds of devices in the same enclosed space trying to talk to the same tower some miles away on the lower bandwidth 5G channel that can penetrate walls, and you can see how 5G access is effectively being “denied” simply by the nature of the business. Walmart could implement an on-premises 5G relay to solve the issue, but why would they want to take on that tech debt? All they are required to do by law is make sure E911 is not impeded by the building or operations of the business. They don’t owe you access to other radio waves when on their premises.
If this regulation were to somehow be applied to passive blocking like what I’ve described, then Faraday cages would be illegal-- which aren’t, again as long as E911 is not impeded. This would also make high security bamk vaults illegal due to the thick wall construction.
which FCC regulations in particular?
I just checked and they actually disabled AI Overview. LMAO
You’re remembering correctly, every other logic gate can be built from NAND gates, which is the foundation of this sort of minimal-instruction-set exercise. Beyond that, you need to be able to move data and change your program counter (jump, often conditionally). Then, if you want parity with modern instruction sets beyond just being turning complete, you need return and interrupt for control flow.
lol why?
Bookmarking your comment so I can come back to it in a couple hours, if I hopefully remember to.
But yes, almost. I don’t think the interrupt is necessary and the return isn’t under certain architectures. I have a doc on my computer somewhere where I was investigating what the absolute minimum was to make a turning complete machine and, to my recollection, there was only 4-6 instructions that were absolutely necessary. The ones I remember off the top of my head are NAND, MOV, JUMPIF, and then I believe I included NOP in accordance with some principle. RET and INT were convenience features in this design.
there is an additional layer to this joke for those who understand turing completeness. And it elevates it to a whole other level of snark.
Yeah I got it completely wrong.
Yeah that one’s on me. I did Google lens it, but I realized I had no hope of knowing what glyphs those were, I just assumed Japanese cause idk. But good call.
Works fine for me on first glance, with ETP set to strict. Perhaps due to the recent domain cut-over in the web stack?
If it wasn’t obvious that the Debian box is a parody, here’s what the Japanese Chinese text along the top reads on each box:
Please read the instructions carefully and use it under the guidance of a physician. It is strictly prohibited to be used in food and feed processing.
Please read the installation instructions carefully and use it under the guidance of the administrator. It is strictly prohibited to use for server installation.
so yes, the title is correct-- this is not a coincidence, the Debian box was made explicitly for this joke
edit: thanks for the correction folks, honestly thought it looked more like Japanese than Chinese at first glance and I am obviously not an expert in either. Appreciate the call-out, very deserved.
Translation: “HELP I JUST BOUGHT THIS THING OFF AMAZON THAT’S SUPPOSED TO GIVE ME FREE TV TO DISTRACT MY KIDS BUT NOW ITS SAYING THINGS I DONT UNDERSTAND AND IM SCARED”
Also, please someone send her a L1ZY
Red Hat
No, you’re angry at IBM. When news of the IBM acquisition broke, sector veteran colleagues I’m close with moaned and groaned that IBM was sure to do something to piss everyone off again, which was apparently their habit a couple decades back. Sure enough, they could not have been more accurate in their assessment.
Turns out IBM is three hot messes in a trenchcoat and always has been. Hence why they have already lost the Quantum wars and likely the GenAI wars as well. One AI vet I know says they’re posed to even lose the AI war altogether, which is pathetic given the groundwork provided by Watson alone.
you have to flip the mouse on it’s back to charg it how tf is that logical
nevermind the fact that you don’t need to make legacy compatibility a hassle. The Darwin kernel should still maintain backwards compatibility and if it doesn’t then LMAO
Linux is freedom, Windows is serfdom, Mac is just dumb.
Idk about hierarchy but PATH
is a thing and the proper terminology is filepath, so the word path becomes ambiguated as it could be used to refer to either. Hence why I say it is bad practice to use it as a primary reference in conversation. Otherwise you’ll get interns and users modifying their PATH
for no damn reason and wondering why nothing works.
As long as you don’t call it a path.
This deserves a ban imo
Are homemade PCBs really that effective? I’d wanted to try my hand at them but never could settle whether it was worth attempting.