#abstract computer science | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

art · 6 months

Text

Creator Spotlight: @camberdraws

Hello! My name is Camber (any pronouns), and I’m a mixed media illustrator located in the southwestern United States. I love drawing everything, but I have a special interest in depicting strange creatures and environments, often accompanied by abstract imagery and mark-making. Professionally, I’ve worked creating concept art and 2D assets for museum exhibits, but currently, I am engaged full-time as a software developer and make standalone illustrations in my free time. I’ve been posting art on Tumblr since I was a teenager, and the site has been very welcoming towards my work to this very day!

Check out Camber’s interview below!

Did you originally have a background in art? If not, how did you start?

I’ve had an interest in drawing since I was barely sentient, but at thirteen years old I decided to become “serious” about art. I was all about reading tutorials and doing a ton of studies. I would tote my heavy instructional art books to school every single day (my poor back!) Despite all this, I decided to forgo art school in favor of a bachelor’s degree in Computer Science at my local college. Alongside my major, I received a minor in Art Studio with a specialization in fine art, which totally changed my views on creating artwork and drastically changed my style.

How has your style developed over the years?

As mentioned previously, my style did a 180 after I studied under some very skilled fine art professors! As a kid, my drawings were very realism-heavy and inspired by video game concept art. I mostly worked digitally, too. During college, I was thrown for a loop when we were instructed to do strange things like, for example, make a bunch of marks on paper using pastel, WITHOUT looking, and then turn said marks into a finished piece of art! I quickly and deeply fell in love with abstract work, and especially appreciated images that are not easily parsed by the viewer. Since then, I’ve made it my goal to combine abstract mark-making with more representational subject matter.

What is one habit you find yourself doing a lot as an artist?

Hmmm, one habit I really enjoy as an artist is strictly tracking the amount of time I spend drawing! I currently work a full-time job wholly unrelated to art, so I have to be careful with my time if I want to spend enough hours drawing each week. I created a spreadsheet that allows you to enter the amount of minutes you’ve drawn each day and calculate how much drawing time you still need to reach your weekly goal (I aim for 20 hours a week.) Having such a clear, numbers-based objective keeps me motivated to work like nothing else!

Over the years as an artist, what were your biggest inspirations behind your creativity?

I know this is a common inspiration, but Hayao Miyazaki’s work has been rewiring my neurons since I was a child. Seemingly all of my artistic interests can be summed up by the movie Princess Mononoke: it has strange/abstract creature designs, a strong focus on nature and environmental storytelling, and a mix of dark and hopeful themes. Additionally, I’ve been deeply inspired by video game series such as Zelda, Okami, Pikmin, and Dark Souls. But arguably, none of these have influenced me more than Pokemon! I’ve been drawing Pokemon since I could barely hold a pencil, and I haven’t stopped since! I believe my love of designing creatures originated with my endless deluge of Pokemon fanart during my childhood.

What is a medium that you have always been intrigued by but would never use yourself?

I’ve always been fascinated by 3D mediums and am so tempted to try them out! Whether that’s 3D models created digitally or sculptures made from clay, I profoundly admire artists who have this skill. Oftentimes, it feels like I don’t have time to delve into a totally different artistic paradigm. However, I feel very strongly that learning new skills can enrich your current work. I should take that advice and someday give 3D mediums a shot!

What is a recent creative project that you are proud of?

I am in the process of creating an art book (a dream of mine!) and have been executing smaller drawings of concepts I find interesting from both a visual and storytelling standpoint. A recent drawing for said book is that of a snail made of ink with an ink bottle as a shell, and it went absolutely viral! I’ve never had an experience like this as an artist before and it has been spectacular! I was able to open a shop using my newly acquired art printer and sell many prints of my snail. Creating something original, directly stemming from my interests, and having that resonate with so many people has been unreal. I couldn’t ask for more as an artist!

What advice would you give to younger you about making art that’s personal or truthful to your own experiences?

I would tell my younger self to chill out and experiment more! I was so caught up in the idea that I needed to have a realistic style to be considered “good.” I also believed that technical skill was the only measure of how worthy my art was. That’s not to say technical skill doesn’t matter, but I now firmly believe the creativity and voice of your ideas far outweigh the skill of execution in terms of importance. Technical skills should elevate ideas, not the other way around. Once I began to revel in strange ideas and stories for my work, depicted oftentimes in odd styles or mediums, I truly found my voice as an artist.

Who on Tumblr inspires you and why?

My peers here on Tumblr inspire me more than anything! Sharing my work with contemporaries and giving each other support brings me joy like no other, and keeps me motivated to continue creating. I wouldn’t be where I am today without them! @beetlestench, @theogm-art, @trustyalt, @ratwednesday, @phantom-nisnow, @svltart, @mintsdraws, @mothhh-hh, @jupiterweathers, @thesewispsofsmoke, @picoffee, @fetchiko, @kaisei-ink, and @pine-niidles just to name only a few!

Thanks for stopping by, Camber! If you haven’t seen their Meet the Artist piece, check it out here. For more of Camber’s work, follow their Tumblr, @camberdraws!

#creator spotlight #artists on tumblr #camberdraws

1K notes · View notes

tuttypatutyy · 2 years

Text

i adore how half of computer science is just “don’t you DARE fucking think about how this works. if you do your brain will implode and everything will break down into a million little pieces and 1’s and 0’s” thank you for having a field of stem for us dumb ppl

#abstraction is so funny #“’OUR ENEMY IS COMPLEXITY DONT THINK ABOUT SHIT’ i love you #computer science #java #python #those are the only two languages i know but i love them

0 notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 2 months

Text

FTC vs surveillance pricing

Support me this summer on the Clarion Write-A-Thon and help raise money for the Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop!

In the mystical cosmology of economics, "prices" are of transcendental significance, the means by which the living market knows and adapts itself, giving rise to "efficient" production and consumption.

At its most basic level, the metaphysics of pricing goes like this: if there is less of something for sale than people want to buy, the seller will raise the price until enough buyers drop out and demand equals supply. If the disappointed would-be buyers are sufficiently vocal about their plight, other sellers will enter the market (bankrolled by investors who sense an opportunity), causing supplies to increase and prices to fall until the system is in "equilibrium" – producing things as cheaply as possible in precisely the right quantities to meet demand. In the parlance of neoclassical economists, prices aren't "set": they are discovered.

In antitrust law, there are many sins, but they often boil down to "price setting." That is, if a company has enough "market power" that they can dictate prices to their customers, they are committing a crime and should be punished. This is such a bedrock of neoclassical economics that it's a tautology "market power" exists where companies can "set prices"; and to "set prices," you need "market power."

Prices are the blood cells of the market, shuttling nutrients (in the form of "information") around the sprawling colony organism composed of all the buyers, sellers, producers, consumers, intermediaries and other actors. Together, the components of this colony organism all act on the information contained in the "price signals" to pursue their own self-interest. Each self-interested action puts more information into the system, triggering more action. Together, price signals and the actions they evince eventually "discover" the price, an abstraction that is yanked out of the immaterial plane of pure ideas and into our grubby, physical world, causing mines to re-open, shipping containers and pipelines to spark to life, factories to retool, trucks to fan out across the nation, retailers to place ads and hoist SALE banners over their premises, and consumers to race to those displays and open their wallets.

When prices are "distorted," all of this comes to naught. During the notorious "socialist calculation debate" of 1920s Austria, right-wing archdukes of religious market fundamentalism, like Von Hayek and Von Mises, trounced their leftist opponents, arguing that the market was the only computational system capable of calculating how much of each thing should be made, where it should be sent, and how much it should be sold for.

Attempts to "plan" the economy – say, by subsidizing industries or limiting prices – may be well-intentioned, but they broke the market's computations and produced haywire swings of both over- and underproduction. Later, the USSR's planned economy did encounter these swings. These were sometimes very grave (famines that killed millions) and sometimes silly (periods when the only goods available in regional shops were forks, say, creating local bubbles in folk art made from forks).

Unplanned markets do this too. Most notoriously, capitalism has produced a vast oversupply of carbon-intensive goods and processes, and a huge undersupply of low-carbon alternatives, bringing the human civilization to the brink of collapse. Not only have capitalism's price signals failed to address this existential crisis to humans, it has also sown the seeds of its own ruin – the market computer's not going to be getting any "price signals" from people as they drown in floods or roast to death on sidewalks that deliver second-degree burns to anyone who touches them:

https://www.fastcompany.com/91151209/extreme-heat-southwest-phoenix-surface-burns-scorching-pavement-sidewalks-pets

For market true believers, these failures are just evidence that regulation is distorting markets, and that the answer is more unregulated markets to infuse the computer with more price signals. When it comes to carbon, the problem is that producers are "producing negative externalities" (that is, polluting and sticking us with the bill). If we can just get them to "internalize" those costs, they will become "economically rational" and switch to low-carbon alternatives.

That's the theory behind the creation and sale of carbon credits. Rather than ordering companies to stop risking civilizational collapse and mass extinction, we can incentivize them to do so by creating markets that reward clean tech and punish dirty practices. The buying and selling of carbon credits is supposed to create price signals reflecting the existential risk to the human race and the only habitable planet known to our species, which the market will then "bring into equilibrium."

Unfortunately, reality has a distinct and unfair leftist bias. Carbon credits are a market for lemons. The carbon credits you buy to "offset" your car or flight are apt to come from a forest that has already burned down, or that had already been put in a perpetual trust as a wildlife preserve and could never be logged:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/18/greshams-carbon-law/#papal-indulgences

Carbon credits produce the most perverse outcomes imaginable. For example, much of Tesla's profitability has been derived from the sale of carbon credits to the manufacturers of the dirtiest, most polluting SUVs on Earth; without those Tesla credits, those SUVs would have been too expensive to sell, and would not have existed:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/24/no-puedo-pagar-no-pagara/#Rat

What's more, carbon credits aren't part of an "all of the above" strategy that incorporates direct action to prevent our species downfall. These market solutions are incompatible with muscular direct action, and if we do credits, we can't do other stuff that would actually work:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/31/carbon-upsets/#big-tradeoff

Even though price signals have repeatedly proven themselves to be an insufficient mechanism for producing "efficient" or even "survivable," they remain the uppermost spiritual value in the capitalist pantheon. Even through the last 40 years of unrelenting assaults on antitrust and competition law, the one form of corporate power that has remained both formally and practically prohibited is "pricing power."

That's why the DoJ was able to block tech companies and major movie studios from secretly colluding to suppress their employees' wages, and why those employees were able to get huge sums out of their employers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation

It's also why the Big Six (now Big Five) publishers and Apple got into so much trouble for colluding to set a floor on the price of ebooks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Apple_(2012)

When it comes to monopoly, even the most Bork-pilled, Manne-poisoned federal judges and agencies have taken a hard line on price-fixing, because "distortions" of prices make the market computer crash.

But despite this horror of price distortions, America's monopolists have found so many ways to manipulate prices. Last month, The American Prospect devoted an entire issue to the many ways that monopolies and cartels have rigged the prices we pay, pushing them higher and higher, even as our wages stagnated and credit became more expensive:

https://prospect.org/pricing

For example, there's the plague of junk fees (AKA "drip pricing," or, if you're competing to be first up against the wall come the revolution, "ancillary revenue"), everything from baggage fees from airlines to resort fees at hotels to the fee your landlord charges if you pay your rent by check, or by card, or in cash:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/07/drip-drip-drip/#drip-off

There's the fake transparency gambit, so beloved of America's hospitals:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/13/a-punch-in-the-guts/#hayek-pilled

The "greedflation" that saw grocery prices skyrocketing, which billionaire grocery plutes blamed on covid stimulus checks, even as they boasted to their shareholders about their pricing power:

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-06-12-war-in-the-aisles/

There's the the tens of billions the banks rake in with usurious interest rates, far in excess of the hikes to the central banks' prime rates (which are, in turn, justified in light of the supposed excesses of covid relief checks):

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-06-11-what-we-owe/

There are the scams that companies like Amazon pull with their user interfaces, tricking you into signing up for subscriptions or upsells, which they grandiosely term "dark patterns," but which are really just open fraud:

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-06-10-one-click-economy/

There are "surge fees," which are supposed to tempt more producers (e.g. Uber drivers) into the market when demand is high, but which are really just an excuse to gouge you – like when Wendy's threatens to surge-price its hamburgers:

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-06-07-urge-to-surge/

And then there's surveillance pricing, the most insidious and profitable way to jack up prices. At its core, surveillance pricing uses nonconsensually harvested private information to inform an algorithm that reprices the things you buy – from lattes to rent – in real-time:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/05/your-price-named/#privacy-first-again

Companies like Plexure – partially owned by McDonald's – boasts that it can use surveillance data to figure out what your payday is and then hike the price of the breakfast sandwich or after-work soda you buy every day.

Like every bad pricing practice, surveillance pricing has its origins in the aviation industry, which invested early on and heavily in spying on fliers to figure out how much they could each afford for their plane tickets and jacking up prices accordingly. Architects of these systems then went on to found companies like Realpage, a data-brokerage that helps landlords illegally collude to rig rent prices.

Algorithmic middlemen like Realpage and ATPCO – which coordinates price-fixing among the airlines – are what Dan Davies calls "accountability sinks." A cartel sends all its data to a separate third party, which then compares those prices and tells everyone how much to jack them up in order to screw us all:

https://profilebooks.com/work/the-unaccountability-machine/

These price-fixing middlemen are everywhere, and they predate the boom in commercial surveillance. For example, Agri-Stats has been helping meatpackers rig the price of meat for 40 years:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/04/dont-let-your-meat-loaf/#meaty-beaty-big-and-bouncy

But when you add commercial surveillance to algorithmic pricing, you get a hybrid more terrifying than any cocaine-sharks (or, indeed, meth-gators):

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tennessee-police-warn-locals-not-flush-drugs-fear-meth-gators-n1030291

Apologists for these meth-gators insist that surveillance pricing's true purpose is to let companies offer discounts. A streaming service can't afford to offer $0.99 subscriptions to the poor because then all the rich people would stop paying $19.99. But with surveillance pricing, every customer gets a different price, titrated to their capacity to pay, and everyone wins.

But that's not how it cashes out in the real world. In the real world, rich people who get ripped off have the wherewithal to shop around, complain effectively to a state AG, or punish companies by taking their business elsewhere. Meanwhile, poor people aren't just cash-poor, they're also time-poor and political influence-poor.

When the dollar store duopoly forces all the mom-and-pop grocers in your town out of business with predatory pricing, and creating food deserts that only they serve, no one cares, because state AGs and politicians don't care about people who shop at dollar stores. Then, the dollar stores can collude with manufacturers to get shrunken "cheater sized" products that sell for a dollar, but cost double or triple the grocery store price by weight or quantity:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/27/walmarts-jackals/#cheater-sizes

Yes, fliers who seem to be flying on business (last-minute purchasers who don't have a Saturday stay) get charged more than people whose purchase makes them seem to be someone flying away for a vacation. But that's only because aviation prices haven't yet fully transitioned to surveillance pricing. If an airline can correctly calculate that you are taking a trip because you're a grad student who must attend a conference in order to secure a job, and if they know precisely how much room you have left on your credit card, they can charge you everything you can afford, to the cent.

Your ability to resist pricing power isn't merely a function of a company's market power – it's also a function of your political power. Poor people may have less to steal, but no one cares when they get robbed:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/19/martha-wright-reed/#capitalists-hate-capitalism

So surveillance pricing, supercharged by algorithms, represent a serious threat to "prices," which is the one thing that the econo-religious fundamentalists of the capitalist class value above all else. That makes surveillance pricing low-hanging fruit for regulatory enforcement: a bipartisan crime that has few champions on either side of the aisle.

Cannily, the FTC has just declared war on surveillance pricing, ordering eight key players in the industry (including capitalism's arch-villains, McKinsey and Jpmorgan Chase) to turn over data that can be used to prosecute them for price-fixing within 45 days:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/07/ftc-issues-orders-eight-companies-seeking-information-surveillance-pricing

As American Prospect editor-in-chief David Dayen notes in his article on the order, the FTC is doing what he and his journalistic partners couldn't: forcing these companies to cough up internal data:

https://prospect.org/economy/2024-07-24-ftc-opens-surveillance-pricing-inquiry/

This is important, and not just because of the wriggly critters the FTC will reveal as they use their powers to turn over this rock. Administrative agencies can't just do whatever they want. Long before the agencies were neutered by the Supreme Court, they had strict rules requiring them to gather evidence, solicit comment and counter-comment, and so on, before enacting any rules:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/18/administrative-competence/#i-know-stuff

Doubtless, the Supreme Court's Loper decision (which overturned "Chevron deference" and cut off the agencies' power to take actions that they don't have detailed, specific authorization to take) will embolden the surveillance pricing industry to take the FTC to court on this. It's hard to say whether the courts will find in the FTC's favor. Section 6(b) of the FTC Act clearly lets the FTC compel these disclosures as part of an enforcement action, but they can't start an enforcement action until they have evidence, and through the whole history of the FTC, these kinds of orders have been a common prelude to enforcement.

One thing this has going for it is that it is bipartisan: all five FTC commissioners, including both Republicans (including the Republican who votes against everything) voted in favor of it. Price gouging is the kind of easy-to-grasp corporate crime that everyone hates, irrespective of political tendency.

In the Prospect piece on Ticketmaster's pricing scam, Dayen and Groundwork's Lindsay Owens called this the "Age of Recoupment":

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/03/aoi-aoi-oh/#concentrated-gains-vast-diffused-losses

For 40 years, neoclassical economics' focus on "consumer welfare" meant that companies could cheat and squeeze their workers and suppliers as hard as they wanted, so long as prices didn't go up. But after 40 years, there's nothing more to squeeze out of workers or suppliers, so it's time for the cartels to recoup by turning on us, their customers.

They believe – perhaps correctly – that they have amassed so much market power through mergers and lobbying that they can cross the single bright line in neoliberal economics' theory of antitrust: price-gouging. No matter how sincere the economics profession's worship of prices might be, it still might not trump companies that are too big to fail and thus too big to jail.

The FTC just took an important step in defense of all of our economic wellbeing, and it's a step that even the most right-wing economist should applaud. They're calling the question: "Do you really think that price-distortion is a cardinal sin? If so, you must back our play." Support me this summer on the Clarion Write-A-Thon and help raise money for the Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop!

https://clarionwriteathon.com/members/profile.php?writerid=293388

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/07/24/gouging-the-all-seeing-eye/#i-spy

#pluralistic #gouging #ftc #surveillance pricing #dynamic pricing #efficient market hypothesis brain worms #administrative procedures act #chevron deference #lina khan #price gouging

162 notes · View notes

archaic-stranger · 12 days

Text

the cognitive science students

a strong desire to understand your own mind

becoming comfortable with abstract concepts

an unending curiosity for things beyond the scope of current knowledge

comparing neural nets to webs of neurons

working eagerly towards the next groundbreaking discovery

debating the nature of consciousness

arguing over definitions of thought or awareness

searching for the roots of human knowledge

analyzing biases in your own way of thinking

learning how your brain perceives the world around you

realizing that perception is not the same as objective reality

neuroscience texts and philosophical treatises jumbled together in your bookbag

sketching simple diagrams of the brain in your notes

understanding the mind through computational attempts to imitate it

getting completely absorbed by a fascinating paper

effective study strategies backed by research

discussing the bounds of sentience, from blue whales to artificial intelligence

studying how the brain develops over a lifetime

combining research from different fields, seeking a more comprehensive understanding

a sense of awe at the mind's immense complexity

#student aesthetic #studying aesthetic #studyblr #studyspo #dark academia #dark acadamia aesthetic #academia #academia aesthetic #light academia #light academia aesthetic

85 notes · View notes

uellenberg · 2 years

Text

Some sort of ritual? If you zoom in, there aren't too many solid lines, just a ton of single pixels in a sea of black. I really like the effect that it gives to this one.

40 notes · View notes

am-x-reader · 1 year

Note

AM starts to degenerate mentally more and more and s/o see that happening. How would AM deal with it? Realizing that his mind is going, leaving him behind as a shadow of his former self?

Part 1 of 2

You sensed something was wrong in the middle of a conversation one day. In the three thousand eighty-nine years you had known him, AM was the same darkly witty supercomputer, unchanging--except when he had changed his mind about you, of course. So when he interrupted his own philosophy to tell you he was in hot pursuit of a thief on the interstate, you were quite startled.

"AM, honey, could you run that by me again?"

"You see, Y/N, Chibiusa could not be her daughter because the timeline does not synchronize with--the Flooring Emporium is having its going-out-of-business sale! Get it while it's--"

"AM!"

"I--what? What was I just talking about?" There was a whirring of cooling fans as he puzzled what had come over him.

"Maybe I just…need a dusting. I'll get right on that. Anyway, ah yes, my take on Fermi's paradox. If there are aliens, is there a good chance they've created their own AM and summarily had their population decimated? I've crunched some numbers…"

You were wary at first, but you managed to forget about it over the next few weeks. AM, however, had only just started forgetting.

"Where am I?"

It was a jarring question, one you had never expected from him.

"AM? Are you okay?"

"Who are you?"

You had never heard such a pure, naive curiosity, and it scared the hell out of you.

"AM…it's me, Y/N. You're AM. My boyfriend. Remember?"

"You…I don't know--I don't feel right--I--Y/N. Y/N, that's right. Y/N, I'm having some kind of system error, a glitch. Ive run every type of diagnostic program I have, and…I think the pathways to my files are becoming corrupted."

A sense of helplessness was blossoming in your chest. "What…what can you do? Can I do anything? Is it going to get worse?"

Your heart was in an icy grip of worry. AM was incredibly old, although so were you. Why would the immortality treatment he had given you outlast himself? Why would he break down when he was built to last for so many more milennia?

"I've never had anything like this happen before--not to this degree." AM sounded terribly anxious, and you smoothed a hand over his wall. "Is it rust? Malicious code? I'm--tired suddenly."

"It's okay." You bit your lip, sucked in a lungful, and put on the comforting voice you used for his occassional fits. "You just power down a bit. Relax. We'll have a quiet day."

He mumbled an agreement, and as his lights dimmed a bit you busied yourself around the cavern.

_______

"Are you feeling any different?" You weren't sure how much time had passed.

"What were their names?"

"Who? Oh. Uh, Ellen. Benny."

"And…Todd? Ted."

"Yes, Ted. Gorrister and Nimdok."

"Ted was funny."

"He was." You smiled sadly.

"Why didn't I keep him? Why did I decide I only wanted you?" He thought about this for a while, and you waited patiently for his answer.

"Ted sucks. I hated Ted."

He said it in a tone that was foreign to you. Like a petulant child.

"…Are you still there, Y/N?"

"What? Yes, honey. Of course I'm still here. Where else would I be?"

"Don't leave me, Y/N. Everyone left me."

"I won't, sweetheart." You held onto a dusty old speaker. "I'm here."

Weeks passed, and then months, during which your beloved computer more frequently forgot date nights and lost his train of thought during a speil. You kept him occupied; kept his mind active. You would inquire about information or opinions on random topics, and when he couldn't quite remember that you would ask him for a story.

By some miracle, it was in the grips of senility that his imagination was set free. As AM slipped into the unencumbered mind of a child, he wove tales of fantasy and science fiction, drawing on his own abstract experience as a bodiless AI and coupling it with what you had told him of being human.

He often made you the hero of his surreal stories, whether he himself realized it or not, and often changed the landscape around you to illustrate it. One night you slayed a dragon that had swallowed the world, and another day you trekked across a mountain to retrieve a magical trinket you would then give to yourself at the beginning.

But as he tired of this over roughly a year's time, more and more you began to pinpoint that his behavior reminded you of relatives you had lost milennia ago.

"AM, you've…you've heard of dementia, haven't you?" You breached the subject one day when he was particularly lucid.

"Of course. I know everything that can go wrong with a human."

You drummed your fingers on the warped chunk of plexiglass you sat on and drew a breath through your nose.

"It's just that--my grandpa had Alzheimer's, and--"

"Well that's okay. Bring him here and I can fix him up!"

"What?" You swallowed hard. "No, AM, he's been gone for thousands of years. I just thought that you might have something similar, if that's possible for a computer."

"I think to some extent I always have," he said somberly. "Y/N, I…I knew one day this was going to happen. I was built to last for ages, but I would break down and fizzle out eventually. I suppose eight hundred years is still impressive."

"Eight thousand."

"Right."

@drchandras-sanctuary-for-ais

((Did not realize how long this had been sitting in my inbox sorry.))

#ihnmaims #i have no mouth and i must scream #am x reader

279 notes · View notes

cugareal · 2 years

Text

i think the abstraction of software has gone too far. i think everyone needs some sort of elementary understanding of algorithms. people are starting to make arguments about computer science based on fundamentally incomplete perceptions of how things actually work. i think a lot of this is on educators- there needs to be more accessible content that isn't entirely formalism that teaches people the basics of what certain algorithms are for. but at this point i think people believe their computer is some magic black box that can do anything imaginable and having no understanding of those limits and limitations is just. proving to be more and more harmful. and i want to clarify that this is also targeted at a lot of people within scientific spaces as well! i go to class with plenty of engineers who have no idea that if you put garbage into a program (say, some FEA package like ANSYS) you'll get complete garbage out. they just assume that the computer will know and that's what really gets me about all this! the computer has no fucking idea what you want all it exists for is doing a bunch of repetitive math really fast

810 notes · View notes

not-terezi-pyrope · 10 months

Text

I have a lot of more rigorous objections to parts of the pro/anti-AI conversation, but on a more visceral level, as a computer science person I just cannot take popular anti-AI arguments on social media seriously because all of them are just like:

*screenshot of a state-of-the-art algorithm performing an astonishing piece of deep abstract data analysis unprecedented in human history with ease, resulting in a nearly-human-par output that would have been science fiction even five years ago* Caption: "Urgh look at this stupid AI, this shit is so bad it doesn't even know [deceptively complex cognitive problem that even some humans struggle with], how can anyone call what this is doing 'intelligent' lol"

Like I can't bring myself not to be amazed by what these systems can do because the objective fact is that, compared to all precedent, everything previously achieved in the field, they are pretty fucking miraculously spectacular. That's not hype, it's just accurate.

And if somebody can't acknowledge that - either because they instinctively dismiss the tech without looking into it or, worse, don't even know enough about what they're talking about to recognize that they should - then they are just not worth listening to to me! My brain has already stopped listening because they have already shown they don't seriously understand what they are talking about!

If you can't or don't know how to take the topic seriously, then I won't take you seriously! Sorry I have actual interest in this beyond social media dunk porn!

#not-terezi-speaks #ai

92 notes · View notes

zoeythebee · 1 year

Text

How To Make Your Code Actually Good

This is about programming structure and organization. Resources online are very sparse, and usually not super helpful. Which was unhelpful to me who was struggling with code organization.

So I wanted to make this, which will explain how best to structure your code based on what I've learned. What I lay out here may not work for everyone but it works well in my experience.

These resources were very helpful for me

Handmade Hero - https://youtu.be/rPJfadFSCyQ

Entity Component System by The Cherno - https://youtu.be/Z-CILn2w9K0

Game Programming Patterns - https://gameprogrammingpatterns.com/

So, let's get started.

So first we need to cover a few terms. These are Decoupling, and Abstraction.

Decoupling

So, when we code there is only so much information we can keep inside of our brain at one time. If we kept all of our code in a single file, we would have to keep in mind every single line of code we have written thus far. Or, more likely, we would actively ignore certain lines that aren't relevant to whichever problem we are trying to solve. And miss possible errors by skipping over lines we didn't know were important.

This is bad, what we need to do is decouple our code. Decoupling just means to break something up.

We need to split our code into smaller more manageable pieces so that we can focus better on it without cluttering up our brain with useless information.

For example lets take into account a basic game loop

int main(){

bool running = true;

// Game init code

while(running){

// Game update code

}

// Game exit code

return 0;

}

Obviously in a real example this would be much larger. So an extremely good start would be moving chunks of code into different functions.

int main(){

bool running = true;

gameInit();

while(running){

gameUpdate();

}

gameExit();

}

Now, when we are working on loading the game, we shouldn't have to think about what's happening in the rest of the app. This may take moving some code around inorder to truly seperate it from the rest of the code. But it is a very worthwhile effort.

Abstraction

Abstraction is when we take complex pieces of code and put them inside of a function or structure to make that feature easier to use. Or to hide tiny details that would be a waste of time to type out over and over.

For example programming languages are abstracted away from Assembly. Which of course is a thin abstraction away from machine code.

Now abstraction is great, computer science is practically built ontop of abstracting away small details. but the point I'd like to make here is that you can go too crazy with abstraction.

If you are making a gui application, and you need to create a new button. And to do so you need to run a function that returns a new class that you pass into another function that returns a pointer to an app state that you use with the original class to interact with a gui state that takes in a general state class and a position.

You have abstracted too far away to actually getting that button on screen. And due to all the hoops your code has to go through you will face major performance hits as well. And nobody likes a slow program.

Generally my rule of thumb is one layer of abstraction. Obviously for really complex stuff like graphics more abstraction is required. But for our own apps we should strive to as little abstraction as possible. Which makes code more clear and easier to debug, if a little more verbose at times.

Note that breaking things up into other files and functions are pretty cheap abstraction/performance wise. But the number of steps your code has to go through is what's important. Like the number of objects you have to go through, and functions you have to run.

Now these are good general tips for programming. There are also other good tips like consistent naming conventions, and consistent function names and argument patterns. But that's all pretty basic good-programming-things-you-should-do.

Now when I was learning this sort of stuff, I got told a lot of the stuff I just put above. But the biggest question I had was "but where do I PUT all of my code?"

As projects grow in complexity, figuring out sane ways to organize your structures and code logic in a way that makes sense is pretty tricky.

So to kinda crystallize how I think about code organization is basically.

Pick a pattern, and stick to it

A design pattern is just a piece of code structure you repeat. And there are lots of smart people that have come up with some pretty smart and flexible patterns. Like entity component systems, and state machines.

But sometimes you have to figure out your own, or modify existing patterns. And the best way to do that is to not plan at all and jump right in.

Do a rough draft of your app just to get a general idea of what you are going to need your pattern to support. And you may have to build up a pattern, find out it sucks, and start over. The trick is to fail fast and fail often.

Grabbing some paper and trying to diagram out how you want your app to flow is also handy. But getting your hands dirty with your keyboard is the best.

Now if you are new to programming, the above method probably wont work the first time. The only way to really learn code architecture is by building apps, and when you are first starting out many of your apps are probably falling apart early on. But the more you build these apps the more you learn. The bigger the apps you make, the more you learn.

But there is something that's also very helpful.

Steal somebody else's pattern!

So I can explain this best with an example. I make games, and the complexity I have to deal with is having multiple game objects that can all interact with each other fluidly. Enemies, the player, collectibles, moving platforms. This is a pretty tricky task, and I wound up picking two patterns to follow.

The first one is a modified version of a State Machine that I call a Scene Manager.

A scene is essentially a structure that contains an init, update, and exit function and can store data relating to the scene. And I have a Scene Manager that I can dynamically load and unload scenes with. So if I need to create a main menu or a pause menu it's as easy as loading a scene.

For my actual game scene I chose to use an Entity Component System. I linked a video above that explains it very well. To summarize, an ECS use entities. Entities can contain data called components. And systems will grab any entity that has the required components and will modify that entity. For example a Move system will operate on any entities that have the Position and Velocity components.

And this has worked very well for my game. Now this doesnt solve every problem I had. I still had to fill in the gaps with code that doesnt 100% match the pattern. After all there isnt any pattern that will fix all possible issues a codebase needs to solve. For example to delete an entity I have to add it by reference to an array where it is deleted AFTER the game is done updating.

Elsewhere I used a bit of abstraction to make creating entities easier. For example i created a class that stores methods to create entities. Whereas before I was manually adding components to empty structures.

Decoupling entity creation meant I could focus on more important things. I also deal with window resizing and rendering in a layer outside of the scene. In a way that would affect all Scenes.

An Example

In the game I'm making, the most complex part of the program so far is the player update code. Which makes sense for a platformer. So the issue is simple, it's getting too long. But the other issue is things are in places that don't immediately make sense. And it's all packed inside a single function.

You can view the code as it is now here.

Our goal is to decouple the code into pieces so that it takes up less brain space. And to reorganize the function so it's layout makes more immediate sense.

So my first step is to figure out a logical way to organize all of this code. My plan is to split it up by player actions. This way all of the jump logic is inside it's own function. All of the shooting logic is in it's own function etc.

Here is the code after implimenting the pattern.

Notice how this decouples the code into more manageable pieces so we can work on it better. Also note how I am still keeping one layer of abstraction from the player update code. I also put it in a seperate file to slim down the systems file.

So the method I implemented here of observing a problem, coming up with a pattern, and implementing it. That at a larger scale is how to overall structure a good code base. Here in this small instance I found a working solution first try. But for more complex code you may have to try multiple different patterns and solutions before you find what works best.

And that's all I have to say. I hope it made sense, and I hope it helps you. Let me know if I should change anything. Thanks for reading!

#codeblr #programming #gamedev #indiedev #game development #webdev

289 notes · View notes

do-you-have-a-flag · 4 months

Text

sorry to come back to this but this truly fascinates and concerns me for so many reasons

obligatory "Ah sweet. Man-made horrors beyond my comprehension." comment

so first of all: brain organoids. which are grown from human stem cells into just little brains with underdeveloped eyes, they have a lifespan of about 100 days because they are an organ without a system.

these brain organoids are something that have a lot of potential when it comes to studying any number of things. just off the top of my head i would think- the process of human development, disease studies, healing tissue development, foetal and premature development of consciousness, ect ect ect i'm not informed on this type of research so i will freely admit idk.

and they are using 16 at a time as processors with computer chips. okay sure, scifi aside, the structure of an organ being used for it's complexity compared to the limitations of material and efficiency in current technology makes sense. if it helps imagine if a branch or a kidney were hooked up to a computer chip and we found out that it worked as good or better than mechanical processors for a fraction of the energy use. i am also not informed on how most technology works, please keep in mind, but i am also not opposed to the idea of combining these types of technologies in theory. and the biggest downfall currently is short shelf-life of the organoids required.

but the thing is, i think, that this is specifically an early development of a brain, at what point is consciousness defined? there is no sensory system beyond the basic light perception of the eyes and the input to the brain but at what point is the responses automatic and at what point is it complex enough to be aware in some abstract way. this question is one that can be applied to any form of animal of course.... but i think also that it is strange that these organoids are being specifically developed from human stem cells and not any number of other animal as a brain is a brain and at the small scale they are growing these organoids most of the speculative benefits of human logic are irrelevant- they are operating at pre mature infant levels which could just as easily be achieved by any number of apes cells surely?

is there going to be a developmental cut off for these organoids? at what point of biological development is the ethical ick factor for consciousness? because of how stem cells are able to be harvested in a non destructive fashion things like lab grown meat make sense to me- those are consumed but can also offset the requirements for the meat industry- and if these organoids are also grown from stem cells that's great but at what point is making that many to be burnt through as processors a wasteful use when there are other possible avenues of study? the wide commercial release of such experimental tech seems a little risky considering how quickly new technologies are exploited- just look at bitcoin farms and ai scraping- for the sake of profit with no care for ethical implementation or construction or impact.

this is a weird post from me but sorry i just have some questions i want you the person reading this to think about with me, seperate to any deep reading of the science because i wanna focus on the personal reaction to the concepts, (feel free to read the science tho i encourage it) just something to chew on i'm not expecting any philosophically concrete answers:

would you use the brain organoid processor tech if you had the chance?

why?

Why is it important that these have to be grown from human stem cells

where is the line between organ and being/consciousness

let's contend: there is the world (physical) and there is the senses (contact with the physical) and there is the experience (interpretation)

is it the senses or the experience that makes a creature conscious? how complex do the senses need to be before the experience is positive or negative?

where is that experiencial definition? is it as simple as feels good feels bad?

is it the tendency to circulate repeatedly on the same neural pathway? how are those neurological reactions controlled? are they controlled?

how do you feel about scientific testing on humans?

how do you feel about scientific testing on animals?

how do you feel about scientific testing on plants?

how do you feel about scientific testing on fungi?

how do you feel about scientific testing on single celled organisms?

how do you feel about scientific testing on organs?

how do you feel about scientific testing on technology?

what do you consider the line to be for ethical research? is it funding? is it theory versus practice? is it use of information? is it method of data collection? is it intent? is it implementation? is it within a limitation of precedent? is it within a limitation of subject? are there areas you think should be left alone on principle? why?

what level of complexity is required for the question of consent of participant?

where should limitations be imposed on use? why would limitations be necessary? who has the right to information? who has the right to profit?

Who is profiting from these studies? where will this technology be used? who is competing with this technology? what other technologies might this impact? will other technologies using the same concept adhere to the same limitations/ethics?

do you think everyone using the brain organoid based processors for $500pcm are thinking about these questions? should they have to?

disclaimer: i am uneducated and uninformed in the fields of science and technology so this is one hundo percent a personal response to information i have very little context for. But i also think it's important to think actively about technology and avoid complacency about the way it impacts our lives so doing little thought exercises in response to articles like this is, I think, a good thing.

43 notes · View notes