meler

If I use C for a project is the trans police going to come for my gender?

Today is a "very happy to be trans" kind of day. I've got a bit of a fever and don't feel super great, but I feel super happy to be a woman

there's not a lump after today so it looks like it might have been a speed thing

My dance classes explicitly referred to the followers as "ladies" 😭😭 it's so needlessly gendered

I talked about this a bit on sodium's last dance report but I used to do a ton of swing dance too. I learned to follow and lead and a lot of the guys made it really weird

This is not a drill. This girl has hair scrunchies

Back when I did dance lessons with my mom I'd ask her to alternate back and forth between lead and follow (come to think about it this is almost certainly egg shit lmao) so a lot of the people in that social circle knew I could do both and sometimes one of the guys would dance with me when there were a lot of guys at an event. Most of the guys were weird about it though. Like chill out I'm wayyyyyyyyy too young for you anyway I just wanna dance

We shall discover the effects the squats will bring

It's soooo good

I'm reading into the nonsense quite a bit so I might be wrong but I don't think it's circular logic. I think it's just them misunderstanding how the real numbers are constructed and being VERY confident in their misunderstanding.

Their notation of Z10^Z makes me think they're thinking of the reals not as Cauchy sequences of rationals but as functions from Z to Z10. And honestly, I think something like that could be pretty easily (approximately so. Arithmetic would be a pain in the ass to define correctly because you'd be stuck having to worry about carrying your ones in your construction that's so tightly bound to the base 10 numbering system) converted to something equivalent to the more accepted notion of the reals. And it's pretty much how we all intuitively think of numbers anyway.

Their definition of less than also seems to be an attempt at codifying an intuition we all use. None of us ever actually compare reals in our day to day life, unless we're arguing about 0.999... = 1. Any time we are comparing two numbers that are written out, we start at the leftmost place value and read right until the two numbers differ, and use that place value to determine which of the numbers are bigger. It's not immediately clear why this intuition wouldn't work for all reals.

If it is the case that reals are functions from Z to Z10 and if the intuition of less than from finitely long rationals carries over to the infinitely long ones, than it would imply [0, 1) = [0, 0.999] and therefore 1 =/= 0.999...

So unless I am completely wrong about what they are trying to argue, I think it's less circular and more either they think their intuition is the agreed upon definition, or they think their intuition is better than the agreed upon definition.