Very cool, thanks so much!

Thanks!

Fair. I’m still curious how it detects a single atom in the vacuum of space though

But how does a satellite built 50 years ago even detect the energy of that single particle in the vacuum of space? That’s mind boggling.

I think the issue is that saying “sex is indeed binary” despite the presence of anomalies/mutations (no matter how uncommon) is in direct contradiction to the chemistry analogy being presented.

If you’re going to stand firm that “sex is indeed binary” you’re (in the context of this thread) also saying “chemical elements are binary just with some quirky occasional variations out there”

Which might statistically be the case across the entire universe… but also highly oversimplifies the wonders of the natural world. And maybe it’s pedantic but, binary can’t be simultaneously interpreted as both “exactly two states” and “well, mostly two states”. You gotta pick one, at which point the former is more correct.

So no I don’t think there’s negative connotation either just… a lack of connecting the dots with the analogy in the meme.

they exist. they’re real. they’re just not the majority. and that’s ok. they don’t have to be.

Exactly. Just like all of the other non-hydrogen and non-helium atoms in the universe.

I bet if they solicit crowd funding to replace this grant they’d easily surpass its dollar value.

Is there an existing way to donate to the Python Foundation?

Never mind, answered my own question: https://www.python.org/psf/donations/

Certainly interesting to have an algorithm that is extremely lossy (near totally) for the majority of inputs but lossless for some weird edge cases.

That’s a great point and well articulated! Let’s see if we can expand on this together

What do you think AI voices were trained off of?

15 years. 15 years. She got one of your kids got you for 15 years

Or their wealth has grown so rapidly that they gave away half of their 2010 wealth?

It is a social construct, and we live in a society… so put your damn socks on