@rime no worries, I don't read much into likes
Also schelling.pt is for deranged posting more than Twitter
@rime maaaybe there can be a trammell-style fixpoint in the regress?
@rime this does sound a lot like the things going around in my mind
But how the fuck is this then grounded?!
Like we can all be dust theory n everything but that's not great, from a "trying to figure stuff out" perspective
And I don't think one can then talk about the structure of differences of interpretations, bc that relies on some interpretative ground again
@lain i should start collecting those
@shrimp oh no
I do not like this
C library functions are always like: "SYNOPSIS. This function converts foos into bars depending on the user locale. ARGUMENTS. src and dest pointers must be distinct; it is undefined behavior if they are not QPU-aligned. RETURN VALUE. Returns the number of foos converted. A zero value indicates failure, or that zero foos were converted. A negative value indicates that the final foo was only partially converted (function got tired). Check this global variable to find out why."
@astrid @typeswitch EUNRDBL is the sound I make in panic if I try to breathe and drink at the same time
Hooley dooley.
This post is about a "found-in-the-wild" small Turing machine (3-states, 4-symbols), that halts --- after an Ackermann function-level number of steps; using Knuth's up-arrow notation, more than
\[ 14 \uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow 14
\]
and in fact we know exactly how many!
I operate by Crocker's rules[1].