• 0 Posts
  • 15 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2024

help-circle




  • justaderp@lemmy.worldtoaww@lemmy.worldCow sleeping in someone's lap.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I know it’s just a joke. But, black and brown bears are very intelligent and quite peaceful creatures. I’ve run into forty or fifty in the wilderness. I’ve never once felt the bear was considering an attack. They’re smart enough to recognize our complex behaviors as a large risk to their safety.

    The story of the vast majority of humans mauled by bears:

    Your dog has a perfect record of defending the pack. Every single time the target either runs or turns out to be friendly. No other pack member defends. Its primary reason to exist is to defend. A bear has a perfect record of fights with anything but another bear.

    One day the bear smells some food, good stuff it can’t find normally. It’s some campers with their dog. The dog smells the bear, full adrenaline drops for its whole reason to exist, and defends the pack. The bear wins in about one second.

    The human defends the dog. The bear fights because that’s what it’s doing right now. Then, it reconsiders and runs away. Finally, the Forest Rangers track down and kill the bear quietly, preserving the tourism the community relies on.

    We’re really shitty to bears, at least here in the US. They’re not even very dangerous relative an wild elk, moose, or even free range livestock. It’s the big and dumb ones you need to watch out for. And marmot. Never disagree with a marmot.


  • justaderp@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldFuck both of us
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Remember conservation of momentum. The only way the machine can absorb part of the impulse is through friction, heat, and by redirecting the existing chamber pressure after the bullet has left the barrel.

    Remember the human body. Magnitude matters much more than duration. Extending the time of impulse by implementing a slide lessens magnitude, the areas under the impulse curves roughly equivalent.

    I’m going to apply the above to answer your questions to say it again :)

    Does the slide absorb any significant amount of energy?

    For a properly functioning, modern, and typically-designed pistol and a status quo definition of “significant”, the answer is: No. That’s not what it’s designed to do. But, energy can be dissipated slightly if the pistol is compensated: a redirection of chamber pressure from near the end of the barrel, upwards, counter the torque component of the recoil impulse.

    What’s the math on this, say the dissipated energy in a semi auto VS revolver using the same round?

    It’s not quite a good question. The maximum force during the impulse is what a human cares about when analyzing a slide. That’s what’ll effect accuracy of the next round and how sore your hands will be in the morning.

    If minimization of total impulse is what’s being analyzed then one would want to compare rifles. Rifles have larger rounds, longer barrel length thus more time to use chamber pressure to mitigate recoil.

    You’ve good questions for coming into the middle. Go to the beginning: rounds and various types of actions, rifleman 101. Come back to the hard science.


  • Above PugJesus talks about the energy of the round being very large. There’s more to it.

    The derringer design lacks any technology to absorb and extend the impulse of recoil, most importantly the slide found on any modern semi automatic.

    Not only is there extreme recoil, there’s also absolutely nothing to help the shooter deal with it.



  • I’m not actually asking for good faith answers to these questions. Asking seems the best way to illustrate the concept.

    Does the programmer fully control the extents of human meaning as the computation progresses, or is the value in leveraging ignorance of what the software will choose?

    Shall we replace our judges with an AI?

    Does the software understand the human meaning in what it does?

    The problem with the majority of the AI projects I’ve seen (in rejecting many offers) is that the stakeholders believe they’ve significantly more influence over the human meaning of the results than exists in the quality and nature of the data they’ve access to. A scope of data limits a resultant scope of information, which limits a scope of meaning. Stakeholders want to break the rules with “AI voodoo”. Then, someone comes along and sells the suckers their snake oil.









  • Problem:

    The next troubleshooting step implies need for a MB+CPU+RAM.

    A Solution:

    Buy a used rig as a cheap, not often used, but critical tool. Strip it of the case and PSU, put it in an ESD bag, in a box, on a shelf.

    MB have proprietary plugs, or the old standard phased out IIRC early DDR3, or the new standard (old standard + more power pins and connectors). A modern gold PSU likely comes with the adapter to the old standard, serving MBs into DDR2. An adequate tool needs integrated graphics preferably on the CPU (not MB) for reliability; should POST past CPU and RAM; and preferably doesn’t need an adapter to the old standard.

    One reactive experience like OP costs how much money and effort? Most could proactively set a budget of half and easily find a appropriate test rig. It’s cheap insurance.


  • The MB is weak for gen3 PCIe. That’s likely not even 5% loss of GPU performance. It’s a mistake. But, it doesn’t seem worth the money to fix unless there’s also other reasons.

    If you’ve trimmed the fat and still are running low on RAM then it’s the priority. Page file usage always kills performance. If you’re not running low then an upgrade does nothing.

    I’ve a low risk tolerance with my desktop rig. My next upgrades would be a Gold PSU and line interrupt UPS.