• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle


  • So I deleted the story before I posted it, and began to realize that even though I’m 40, and should be past all this, it still hurts, and I’m a deeply broken person.

    The thing about trauma (and it likely is trauma) is that it often just doesn’t go away on its own and you need to do work on it. So, why should you be over it?

    Should is a loaded word as it pretty much always comes from what you learned as a child. You should do that. You should be like this.

    That “should” probably comes from your father when he told you how you should be as a child.

    It sounds like you aren’t over it now, but that’s ok. It’s ok not to be over stuff that happened in childhood. But the important thing to understand is that you can get over it with work. Being aware of that is the first step on that road.




  • JonC@programming.devtoStar Trek@startrek.websiteOn the end of Discovery
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    And at this point, the extended crew of the Discovery was thoroughly sidelined: Burnham’s personal relationships took priority over everything else.

    This is the part that I’ve never got on well with in Discovery.

    In TNG, it’s not a show about Picard, or Riker, or any of the other individuals. It’s a show about the crew. I’ve even seen it said that the actual star of the show is the ship.

    Whereas, with Disco, it’s a show about Michael Burnham and everyone else has a bit part. That always felt weird for a Star Trek show. I want to see how the crew works together to solve problems and overcome things with everyone on an equal footing regardless of their rank in the show.

    And I think that’s why there was such a warm reception to season 3 of Picard. It brought the crew back together. Picard alone isn’t satisfying enough. What we wanted was him as part of the crew.




  • Same, using Chat GPT 4. It explained the steps without prompting, which is different from the single line answer shown in the post too. I got this…

    Let’s break this down step by step:

    1. Sally has 3 brothers.
    2. Each of those brothers has 2 sisters.

    Sally is one of those sisters for each of her 3 brothers. Therefore, the second sister that each brother has would be the same other sister.

    This means that Sally has only 1 other sister, making a total of 2 sisters in the family (including Sally herself).

    So, Sally has 1 sister.



  • That one’s actually really easy to prove numerically.

    Not going to type out a full proof here, but here’s an example.

    Let’s look at a two digit number for simplicity. You can write any two digit number as 10*a+b, where a and b are the first and second digits respectively.

    E.g. 72 is 10 * 7 + 2. And 10 is just 9+1, so in this case it becomes 72=(9 * 7)+7+2

    We know 9 * 7 is divisible by 3 as it’s just 3 * 3 * 7. Then if the number we add on (7 and 2) also sum to a multiple of 3, then we know the entire number is a multiple of 3.

    You can then extend that to larger numbers as 100 is 99+1 and 99 is divisible by 3, and so on.