#numerical analysis

[lesbianchemicalplant]

via “Some disasters caused by numerical errors”:

On February 25, 1991, during the Gulf War, an American Patriot Missile battery in Dharan, Saudi Arabia, failed to track and intercept an incoming Iraqi Scud missile. The Scud struck an American Army barracks, killing 28 soldiers and injuring around 100 other people. A report of the General Accounting office, GAO/IMTEC-92-26, entitled Patriot Missile Defense: Software Problem Led to System Failure at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia reported on the cause of the failure. It turns out that the cause was an inaccurate calculation of the time since boot due to computer arithmetic errors. Specifically, the time in tenths of second as measured by the system's internal clock was multiplied by 1/10 to produce the time in seconds. This calculation was performed using a 24 bit fixed point register. In particular, the value 1/10, which has a non-terminating binary expansion, was chopped at 24 bits after the radix point. The small chopping error, when multiplied by the large number giving the time in tenths of a second, led to a significant error. Indeed, the Patriot battery had been up around 100 hours, and an easy calculation shows that the resulting time error due to the magnified chopping error was about 0.34 seconds.

(The number 1/10 equals

1/2⁴+1/2⁵+1/2⁸+1/2⁹+1/2¹²+1/2¹³+....

In other words, the binary expansion of 1/10 is

0.0001100110011001100110011001100....

Now the 24 bit register in the Patriot stored instead 0.00011001100110011001100 introducing an error of 0.0000000000000000000000011001100... binary, or about 0.000000095 decimal. Multiplying by the number of tenths of a second in 100 hours gives 0.000000095×100×60×60×10=0.34.)

A Scud travels at about 1,676 meters per second, and so travels more than half a kilometer in this time. This was far enough that the incoming Scud was outside the “range gate” that the Patriot tracked. Ironically, the fact that the bad time calculation had been improved in some parts of the code, but not all, contributed to the problem, since it meant that the inaccuracies did not cancel, as discussed here.

The following paragraph is excerpted from the GAO report. The range gate's prediction of where the Scud will next appear is a function of the Scud's known velocity and the time of the last radar detection. Velocity is a real number that can be expressed as a whole number and a decimal (e.g., 3750.2563...miles per hour). Time is kept continuously by the system's internal clock in tenths of seconds but is expressed as an integer or whole number (e.g., 32, 33, 34...). The longer the system has been running, the larger the number representing time. To predict where the Scud will next appear, both time and velocity must be expressed as real numbers. Because of the way the Patriot computer performs its calculations and the fact that its registers are only 24 bits long, the conversion of time from an integer to a real number cannot be any more precise than 24 bits. This conversion results in a loss of precision causing a less accurate time calculation. The effect of this inaccuracy on the range gate's calculation is directly proportional to the target's velocity and the length of the the system has been running. Consequently, performing the conversion after the Patriot has been running continuously for extended periods causes the range gate to shift away from the center of the target, making it less likely that the target, in this case a Scud, will be successfully intercepted.

[x]

The March 13 issue of Science carried an article claiming, on the basis of a report from the General Accounting Office (GAO), that a “minute mathematical error … allowed an Iraqi Scud missile to slip through Patriot missile defenses a year ago and hit U.S. Army barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 28 servicemen.” The article continues with a readable account of what happened. The article says that the computer doing the tracking calculations had an internal clock whose values were slightly truncated when converted to floating-point arithmetic. The errors were proportional to the time on the clock: 0.0275 seconds after eight hours and 0.3433 seconds after 100 hours. A calculation shows each of these relative errors to be both very nearly 2⁻²⁰, which is approximately 0.0001%. The GAO report contains some additional information. The internal clock kept time as an integer value in units of tenths of a second, and the computer's registers were only 24 bits long. This and the consistency in the time lags suggested that the error was caused by a fixed-point 24-bit representation of 0.1 in base 2. The base 2 representation of 0.1 is nonterminating; for the first 23 binary digits after the binary point, the value is 0.1 × (1 - 2⁻²⁰). The use of 0.1 × (1 - 2⁻²⁰) in obtaining a floating-point value of time in seconds would cause all times to be reduced by 0.0001%. This does not really explain the tracking errors, however, because the tracking of a missile should depend not on the absolute clock-time but rather on the time that elapsed between two different radar pulses. And because of the consistency of the errors, this time difference should be in error by only 0.0001%, a truly insignificant amount. Further inquiries cleared up the mystery. It turns out that the hypothesis concerning the truncated binary representation of 0.1 was essentially correct. A 24-bit representation of 0.1 was used to multiply the clock-time, yielding a result in a pair of 24-bit registers. This was transformed into a 48-bit floating-point number. The software used had been written in assembly language 20 years ago. When Patriot systems were brought into the Gulf conflict, the software was modified (several times) to cope with the high speed of ballistic missiles, for which the system was not originally designed. At least one of these software modifications was the introduction of a subroutine for converting clock-time more accurately into floating-point. This calculation was needed in about half a dozen places in the program, but the call to the subroutine was not inserted at every point where it was needed. Hence, with a less accurate truncated time of one radar pulse being subtracted from a more accurate time of another radar pulse, the error no longer cancelled. In the case of the Dhahran Scud, the clock had run up a time of 100 hours, so the calculated elapsed time was too long by 2⁻²⁰ × 100 hours = 0.3433 seconds, during which time a Scud would be expected to travel more than half a kilometer. The roundoff error, of course, is not the only problem that has been identified: serious doubts have been expressed about the ability of Patriot missiles to hit Scuds.

Robert Skeel is a professor of computer science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. From SIAM News, July 1992, Volume 25, Number 4, page 11

[x]

lmao

[balletomaneblog]

what area of math are you studying?

Hi there!

I'm starting my last year of undergrad this fall so I'm still studying all kinds of math and haven't specialized in one research area yet. If I go to grad school I'll specialize further. I am in a research group on graph theory though and this summer I'm working on some research in numerical analysis, which is super fun!

Thanks for asking!

[jadagul]

This week I decided to write something more directly in my wheelhouse, and talk about an unusual way to prove the fundamental theorem of calculus. This doesn't have any direct action items for you take away in your daily life, but it's a fun bit of math!

[informatikerin-freyja]

Can anyone recommend a good book on the theory of numerical methods? Everything I've found so far just appears to be a recipe book of particular methods. I'm looking for something that proves general theorems relating continuous and discrete models.

[dat-a-queenblog]

Weekend To Do List 🌺

to do list for this weekend is ready let's see how much i will be able to cover it 😅

#just trying to be more active on tumblr ....🥹

#Pov : Exam season ahead 🫠

[amimmy]

-R.W. Hamming 

[hyperfixatinator]

Where is the line?

In the comics, Tim Drake's moral code is an enigma to me, particularly his stance on the Batclan's no-kill rule. For all the fans who say he's always one step away from full blown villainy, there are even more saying he's a strict goody two-shoes who could never stoop that low.

Then there's the different takes on where Tim draws the line between these two extremes. Personally, I find that line hard to pinpoint. Digging for canon demonstrations of his morals has lead me to more questions than answers. My biggest question right now is:

What counts as breaking the no-kill rule in Tim's eyes?

Luckily, the Robins 2021 comics shed some light on this. In issue #3, "Tim", or rather an imposter of him, said that choosing not to save someone isn't the same as killing them, and that letting a villain die can be a way to get justice. Normally, this point would be moot since it's not Tim himself who said it. However, at the end of issue #6, the real Tim clarified that what the imposter said WAS his real opinion on the matter.

Not only that, but Tim has shown this belief through his thoughts and actions before. Twice.

The first time goes all the way back to Robin 1991 #5. During the fight against King Snake, Tim kicked him through a nearby window, fifty stories above the ground. As King Snake's life hung in the balance, Shiva appeared and commanded Tim to kill him.

Tim refused. He walked away, leaving King Snake entirely at Shiva's mercy.

What gets me is that Tim made no move to save King Snake from falling. And he made no effort to stop Shiva from committing the murder, either. His only thought as he heard the man's scream was "Fifty stories is a long way to fall."

The second time was in Red Robin 2009 #26. Tim orchestrated a whole plan to manipulate Captain Boomerang into getting killed by Mr. Freeze. The whole time, Tim blamed Captain Boomerang for making all those bad choices, despite Tim being the one raising the chances of them being made. Tim believed he was innocent because he wasn't directly participating.

Tim then stopped that plan, but not for any noble reason. He decided that he couldn't let anyone else kill Captain Boomerang but himself.

Tim couldn't bring himself to do that, either. So he had to spare his father's killer in the end.

This seems pretty cut and dry so far, right? Tim believing that letting villains die is alright as long he doesn't do the deed himself? I'd think so too, if there weren't other moments contradicting this.

In Robin #35, Steph insisted on leaving an enemy who got buried under the snow to die. Tim chastised her for it.

Neither of them were responsible for the snow, or for the enemy getting trapped in it. Plus, that guy tried to kill them with a chainsaw moments prior, so he's not exactly an innocent damsel in distress.

Maybe it was because this enemy wasn't a big enough fish to fry. We didn't really get confirmation that this guy has actually killed before, and he's around goon status at best.

But then in Robin #46, Tim chose to save another enemy who got himself into a deadly situation. That enemy was a murderer known as Young El. This time, Tim wasn't telling anyone else why they should save a murderer's life out loud. These were his private thoughts.

Notice how Tim's inner monologue sounded kind of on-the-fence. He contemplated justice finally catching up with Young El as the floorboards gave way, bringing a support beam down on him in the process.

However, Tim immediately switched gears to rescue Young El from under that beam before the water rose too high.

But Tim, as he told Young El the reasons he's saving him, asked himself "Do I even believe what I'm saying?" He could be asking this about two different things he said here. A) "Maybe it's not too late for you to learn something, Young El.", or B) "Death's easier for you when it's the other guy. Death's never been easy for me."

For Tim to doubt his belief in either of these statements is very interesting. He could be questioning if Young El is already too far gone for redemption, or he could be questioning if seeing someone die has never been easy for himself. For all we know, it could be both.

Unfortunately, Tim never got to see if his choice to save him would pay off. Tim wasn't strong enough to lift that beam, and Young El drowned.

There's a question on my mind as I read these pages. What makes this murderer's death different from when Tim let King Snake fall to his "death"? Sure, King Snake didn't actually die, but Tim didn't know that until later when the man came looking for revenge in Gotham.

Tim was once able to simply walk away from what he was certain would be a killer's demise. But then he's consumed by guilt over not being able to prevent a different killer's death down the line, to the point of hallucinating.

On top of that, what changed Tim's mind later? Red Robin #26 and Robins 2021 #3-6 still happened in the future. The only significant difference I can tell is that these two comics involved the killer's of Tim's parents, making it personal. But if the Imposter from Robins 2021 got his beliefs from his profile before his mother's killer got involved, then does that still hold up?

Maybe we should put a pin on it for now. There are other things Tim's done that brings the details of his no-kill rule into question.

Such as that one time Tim actually killed someone with his bare hands.

In Robin issues #51-52, Tim accidentally killed Lady Shiva while drugged on amarilla, a plant that enhances the user's speed beyond human limitations.

It may be argued if the amarilla altered Tim's mind enough to excuse him of fault or not. However, I want to focus on what happened after Shiva was revived. Here's another question to go with the first one:

Does Tim believe the kill still counts if the victim was revived afterwards?

From what I've gathered, yes and no. It's kind of complicated.

After Tim killed Shiva, he was understandably distressed about it, about how he can never take it back.

But after Shiva came back to life? Nothing. He didn't dwell on the fact he broke the vow to never kill. For something that devastating to happen in his life, it's odd that Tim didn't bring it up ever again, privately or otherwise. Especially considering what happened later in Robin #123, when Tim thought he killed Johnny Warlock.

Tim was utterly inconsolable. He lost all faith in his abilities as Robin, and in himself as a whole. It also contributed to his decision to quit being Robin after his dad found out. In general, he seriously dwelled on that "kill" for a much longer time than he had after killing Shiva. The difference being that he knew Shiva was resuscitated immediately afterwards, while Tim didn't know Johnny survived until issue #141.

But there's the fact that Shiva really did die. Her heart and breathing both stopped. So are we to believe Tim moved on from that so easily because she's alive now? What happened to never getting that back?

Come to think of it, not long after Tim killed and revived Shiva, there was someone else who landed in that same boat. Dick.

In Joker: The Last Laugh #6, Dick brutally attacked the Joker after believing he killed Tim. Dick ended up accidentally killing Joker instead, before the clown was resuscitated.

Here's the thing. While Tim was trying to comfort Dick, saying that it's ok because Joker's alive now, Dick didn't believe so. He was still distraught that he killed someone. The fact Joker came back to life afterwards didn't matter to him. To Dick, it still counted. So what does that say about Tim?

Before we move on, there's another person Tim knows who also died and came back from the grave. Jason.

Tim openly acknowledged Jason was killed before coming back, too. Multiple times. For example, when they met up in Red Hood and the Outlaws 2011 #8.

Tim hadn't shown any signs that he thinks Jason's murder doesn't count anywhere, except for maybe once.

In Knight Terrors: Robin #2, Tim and Jason had a heart-to-heart, and Tim said something strange.

"You survived."

Except Jason didn't survive. He died. To say Jason survived that night would've meant he never died to begin with. Him being alive now doesn't change that. Was this Tim telling a white lie to make Jason feel better? Or does Tim see being revived after death as "surviving"?

Ok, now we can move onto the next question. Or rather, bear with me as we go back to the first question. It's a broad topic with plenty more to talk about.

What does Tim count as breaking the no-kill rule?

We already asked how Tim feels about bringing villains back from the dead after killing them. And we asked how Tim feels about leaving a villain to die without getting directly involved. However, we still don't know how much involvement Tim needs to have in an enemy's death before he'll take responsibility for it.

We can confirm he won't mercy kill in Red Robin #21, even if it means giving someone a fate worse than death. No exceptions.

Tim also doesn't allow anyone he's actively teaming up with to kill, especially if he's the one in command. He's been amicable with known killers before (Huntress and Pru, for example), but only when they remain non-lethal while working alongside him.

Apart from that, though, it becomes less clear. However, I think this is a good place to expand on when Tim blew up a lot of League of Assassins bases in Red Robin #8.

I'm not going into whether or not those explosions actually killed anyone. I've seen evidence supporting both sides of this debate, so I'm just going to say it's up to interpretation. What I AM talking about is whether or not Tim would've felt responsible if they had killed someone.

Before overloading every generator in the LOA database, Tim gave a warning to the Wanderer. He told her that he couldn't be held responsible for what would happen to her if she didn't leave.

After initiating the explosions, Tim warned the White Ghost that they had fifteen seconds to leave before it was too late.

Fifteen seconds. That explanation on the mistake of letting him in might've taken roughly another fifteen to twenty seconds. Did the other bases even get a full minute head start? The way some of the people were already running away could imply they at least got a warning, but it's possible they might not have.

Even if everyone in every base received a warning, would that be enough for Tim to avoid holding himself accountable if they didn't make it out in time? Tim's the one who rigged the bases to explode, but I guess giving someone a warning means it's now their fault for not heeding it?

We can't be sure he even considered the possibility of those explosions killing anyone. Tim knew they were dangerous enough to bring the whole Cradle down, and the other ones we saw looked pretty powerful (except the ones in Ra's hideout). But Tim also called Ra's a murderer right after that happened, which would've been very hypocritical if Tim himself thought he committed murder.

So, my guess is either A) Tim relied on sheer luck for those explosions not causing any casualties and chose to believe they hadn't, or B) Tim didn't believe the deaths of anyone caught in them would be his fault.

Again, this isn't about whether or not blowing up the LOA bases killed anyone. It's about how willing Tim was to take that risk, and if he would've blamed himself for anyone getting killed from it.

Either way, it's canon that Tim had no guilt for the explosions he caused, or for anything he did before Red Robin #22. Just ask the Sword of Sin.

This is an exerpt I got from the Fandom DC Database on the Sword of Sin:

"The Sword of Sin can be ignited with the mind of the wielder, if the person is powerful enough. The sword has the ability to conjure in the mind its victims all of the sins for which they are guilty or have not atoned for."

When Tim was stabbed with this sword, he was immune. The Sword of Sin decided he was innocent. Although, I have to ask how reliable this sword was in making that judgement. If the sword is judging others based on its own set principles, then something's not right here.

The Sword of Sin was also used on Dick, and he wasn't immune. It dug into Dicks subconscious and unearthed memories he'd long since repressed. Memories of himself watching a boy get beaten to near death, and then doing nothing. He just walked away.

Now, tell me why the sword brought this to light, but not the time Tim left King Snake to die!

It wasn't an accident. Tim deliberately chose to leave instead of trying to save this man from the murderous Lady Shiva. Sure, Tim was no match for Shiva and he might've not been able to stop her, but the same could be said for an eight year old Dick not stopping a group of much older kids. Neither of them tried to stop the attackers.

Tim didn't atone for it, either. When King Snake returned in Batman #469, Bruce told King Snake that it wasn't Tim who left him to die. We know that's a lie, but Tim never corrected this. He let Shiva take all the blame.

We have two instances of a boy choosing not to prevent someone from having a near death experience. One guilty, and one innocent.

Did the Sword of Sin think Tim was justified because King Snake was corrupt? That doesn't sound holy to me.

Was it because Tim didn't feel any guilt over it, while Dick did? Can the sword's judgement be thrown off by the victim not feeling any shred of guilt over their actions, even subconsciously?

That could make sense given what we know Tim did in the past: King Snake falling, the vandalism (explosions), and ALL the lying over the years (Tim reviving Shiva might count as atonement, so I'm not including that). If the sword based its judgement on God's will alone, then odds are high it would've picked up on one of these.

Even so, I'm not going to sit here and say this is definitely the case. I'm not familiar enough with how the sword effects other characters to make that call.

If this is indeed false, then did the DC universe's version of God decide to pardon Tim of his sins when he prayed earlier that same issue, despite him not believing he had any? I mean, who knows, right?

You can probably see why there's more questions than answers. The point is Tim didn't have any guilt for the things he did before Red Robin #22. Tim was canonically convinced he had nothing to atone for.

So then why did he say the opposite later in Knight Terrors: Robin #2?!

In the heart-to-heart between Tim and Jason, Tim tells him this:

"You have a lot to atone for...We all do..."

Tim knows that the words "we all" include him, right? By saying this, Tim admitted to also having things he needs to atone for, right?

Is this another white lie to make Jason feel better? Is it one of those slight changes the New 52 made to the canon? If not, then why did he change his mind? Did his no-kill rule change and make him feel guilty for some past actions? Is it not the no-kill rule, but something else?

What changed?!

Where does Tim draw the line?

I don't know. We've narrowed it down to a general area, but it's kinda hard to see a line when it's so blurred it could be a gradient.

Tim baffles me. He acts as a steady moral compass for others when he can't even seem to stay consistent with his own. You're free to call it poor writing (and honestly, fair), but I find his hypocrisy fascinating.

That's what it is, isn't it? Tim's a hypocrite who's completely oblivious to being one. And it's not like this was never mentioned in the comics before. Damian called him out on it!

In Batman & Robin 2011 #10, Damian confronted Tim about his near-murderous reaction when Fist Point killed Artemis (Teen Titans Vol 4 annual #1). Damian then accused Tim of constantly rejecting him because they have more in common than Tim's willing to admit.

It's debatable how accurate that accusation was, but Tim had a pretty volatile reaction to it.

"I believe in every choice I make!"

Does he? I don't think someone who's so sure of what he believes in would contradict himself to this extent. Especially if he wasn't doing it on purpose.

He wouldn't vehemently push Bruce's no-kill rule onto others and berate them for bending that rule, only to go and bend that same rule himself when the Batclan isn't around. He also wouldn't exploit what he thinks are loopholes, decide later that those loopholes broke the no-kill rule, and then earnestly claim he never broke it.

Why is he like this?! He's had arguably the most normal childhood out of the whole Batclan before becoming Robin! What could've made him so fickle about this?!

Where does he draw the line? And how will he know when he's crossed it?

[artful-peculiarities]

I’ve just had this really specific vision of post canon Doug Eiffel being a mechanic. Maybe even though his memories were drained from him, the movements of repair are still familiar, and I think it would also add something to his characterization once he’s back in earth with the others. I’m gonna think about this some more and come back to this post in a bit

[league-of-blorbos]

Ive mentioned this before on my other blog, but everytime I think about it, it astonishes me how much Arcane feels like it successfully pulled off what Hazbin Hotel was trying to do. You got:

Lesbian lead couple that have amazing chemistry despite their different backgrounds and personalities? Arcane did it better than Hazbin

Male characters that are fleshed out enough to have their own narratives but don't overshadow the female leads and instead support their plotlines? Arcane did that better than Hazbin

Diverse character designs that tell you so much about each character and helps them stand out from one another? Arcane did that better than Hazbin

An accurate portrayal of social hierarchy and how even if those in elite positions genuinely care about every person, they still may be blinded by their own privilege? Hazbin barely had that but Arcane did that better than Helluva Boss

Building conflict between two nations where one abuses their power over the other and the lower nation is ready to rise up and start a war for their equality? Arcane did that better than Hazbin

Fast paced plot that tells multiple nuanced stories in a single digit amount of episodes but everything still feels comprehensive and realistic? Arcane did that better than Hazbin

Overarching themes of parenthood without feeling like the show is telling the same story again and again? Arcane did that better than Hazbin and Helluva Boss

Both have gorgeous animation and wonderful musical segments and this one is more debatable than the others, but I feel like Arcane uses their animation and soundtrack much better as a way to tell their story while Hazbin uses it more for style than for adding to or progressing the plot (but obviously both shows use it for both plot and style simultaneously)

I don't feel qualified to talk about their portrayals of trauma, especially when it comes to Angel Dust and Jinx, but I'd love to hear from someone with more experience than me how these two shows compare in that department and in regards to making fictional trauma feel realistic without glamorizing it or only showing it for the sake of being edgy

[starjunkyard]

Good god ep18 s6. House dealing (god-awfully .Full disclosure. The episode opens with house drinking himself half to death with zero regard for himself to the point of unintentionally breaking into his neighbours house and passing out there) with wilson getting back together with his ex-wife while the patient of the episode grapples with his possibly reciprocated love for the woman he loves but cannot Have because she's engaged to be wed with his friend.......... Thirteen egging the patient on to tell her how he really feels but he genuinely Cant Bring Himself To because "my friend's a great guy . He's rich, smart, and he'll treat her well. Me-- I'd do everything I could for her. But it wouldn't be much. And she... she deserves the best." And the episode ends with house resignedly throwing away the sealed envelope that held all the dirt he hired lucas to get on wilson's ex wife to try and break them upOhhhhhhhh oh. OHHHHHHHHHHHHH Ouhhhhhhh. Ouhhhhh the acknowledgement that house would do everything & anything & more for wilson Give .all of himself To Wilson and it still wouldn't be enough because house is House. Because even at his best-- house would still be house and because of that house would never be able to give wilson what he wants What he Needs. Wilson doesn't. Need the misanthropic bastard he's been in love with for 20 years who bites and spits at any threat or sign of emotional intimacy or vulnerability. What wilson. Needs is a woman . A wife and two kids and a white picket fence because that's all wilson is

Its the foundation of his entire self that would bring everything else down with it if it were to crumble. The face that wilson has spent his entire Life honing and sculpting and perfecting to present as the Perfect Hardworking American Man and Son. The perfect husband and treasured son with his own big shiny department and a stainless-white doctor's coat and the Exact Man a woman would Need

What is wilson. who is he What is left of him if he is not needed by a woman; not needed nor wanted any longer by the world he's lived his entire life by to please. What is James Wilson if not what everyone else expects him to be

House is the antithesis to all of that. A man rough and abrasive as sandpaper who makes wilson selfish makes him emotional and stupid. Who encourages wilson to lash out and fight and get angry and stand up for himself and be the exact opposite of what he's worked his entire life to be. Instead of accepting and taking wilson's painstakingly pedantically constructed facade at face value House fucking. Crashes through the walls with a bulldozer. Snatches the mask right off of wilson's face and dangles it over his head goading wilson to go ahead; try and get it back

Wilson is so deathly terrified at the idea of breaking out of the norms he himself has walled himself into-- he can't Bear to think of any other future for himself that is anything other than wholly and completely unnoticeable average monotonous unextraordinary

and House is the exact opposite of unnoticeable average monotonous unextraordinary. House is the apple of Eden that rests on the other side of wilson's pristine-white picket fence. The object of Wilson's every true desire that simultaneously threatens to doom and tear down everything wilson regards protects worships as the one untouchable unquestionable unchangeable truth of his life

House loses before it even starts. No one can compete with that; not even house. By nature, house can never be what wilson needs. What wilson truly desires or wants or needs is another subject entirely, something im genuinely not sure wilson could even grapple with, let alone come to terms with canonically. I fully believe wilson and house are the loves of each other's lives but house will never be what wilson "needs" or "wants" no matter what he does or changes about himself. They love each other more than anything and they want each other and they cant live without each other but House-- intrensically, by nature-- cannot be what Wilson wants.

[gay-victorian-astronomer]

last exam of my undergrad career is shaping up to be long & annoying contour integral hell times

(granted the entire course has been long and annoying integral hell, so... I suppose that's fitting for the final? still doesn't make me want to do it any more)

[dapurinthos]

help the adults are flirting

Sifo-Dyas shifts the books to carry them under one arm and with the Force. He points at Madame Nu. “Hego Damask is?” “A Sith Lord somehow employing a wide-reaching variety of a mind-control spell to ensure that anyone who learns this fact forgets it very shortly after?” “Yes!” His head jerks forward under a Force-assisted backhand to the back of his skull and recovers just in time for Madame Nu to stalk right up into his personal space and shove her face up so far their noses almost touch. “Maybe just Jedi,” I offer. Neither of them looks away from each other but I can feel their focus expand to include me. “When did you figure this out?” Madame Nu asks, pleasantly. The hawk has her prey pierced with a claw and is studying it to see if it's still worth playing with. “More importantly, how did you figure this out?” “Data is still outstanding,” Master Si says, affecting the air of an academic disappointed in their own experiments. His bottom lip juts out the teeniest bit. Do I look like the type of person who would lie? To you? About data? “We are observing subjects to see if our hypothesis is supported.” “You believe this forgetting is limited to the Jedi Order?” “Stop being an outlier, Jocasta.” “Stop being a brat, Sifo-Dyas.” “I’m going to go be elsewhere,” I say. It's very superfluous in this instance. I'm very superfluous in this instance. “And make an appointment with Galactic City planning to look at the old land deeds for this site.” I shift my weight to beneath my ankles so I can tap the floor with my toes. “Other … archives?” If Madame Nu could turn her head upside down like an owl I think she would be doing so right now. Aw, Sithspit. Run. Master Si accompanies the suggestion with a shooing motion. “Over the past thousand years the line of Bane has managed to steal almost all of the Sith holocrons from here so they're pretty much all fakes now. At least one is a disguised listening device. Bye.” I practically skate out of the archives, using the lack of friction between the floor and the bottom of my slippers to make a quick getaway.

[venuczar]

Seeing people write off Viviana as mid when she's at SL7... She gains 47% more damage with her masteries. How many times must we do this?

[pinejay]

thinking abt how the power of a symbol is a function of its meaning to the user, its meaning as understood by the audience and also the wider world (including its meaning throughout time), and the degree of its reflection of reality.

we can use blue to represent alien flora bc of its closeness and yet distinction from green, the primary color of plants on earth with chlorophyll, and the fact that there are blue exotic life forms on earth that are not really but almost botanical (like mushrooms). just as an example of the reflection of reality factor.

on the other hand, a plate of eggs and bacon has strong specifically american cultural implications of a classic breakfast. the imagery is not universal. on top of that, the food could mean something deeply personal to an artist or writer's personal life that may be widely relatable or especially unique. maybe the author's sister regularly stole the bacon off their plate throughout their childhood, and bacon evokes a sense of casual familial dispute or deeper resentment.

but to an audience of another culture, eggs and bacon lose their potency, especially if for example pork is haram. and that's where localization comes in, to bring familiarity back into play, to evoke a similar symbolic resonance as intended by the source material. and yet at the same time, u can trust the audience to have if not a degree of global understanding, at least the ability to infer the meaning of a symbol without the requisite cultural background. i think walking this line is part of the fun of like, examining translations and adaptations.

[sisterdivinium]

One of the many cool things about language is that we will commonly absorb words and expressions from people around us, people we talk to, live with, love...

How peculiar, too, that both a miracle and a betrayal "of the highest order" have taken place. Ava is a "miracle", but so is Adriel still being alive inside that tomb, in a way; Areala "betrayed" Adriel (or vice-versa...), but so did Vincent betray the OCS.

[nontrivialproof]

Spotify recommended Bari Weiss's podcast to me so I spent some time today hate-reading the episode descriptions. And obviously this doesn't matter at all in the larger picture, but the phrasing of this one is killing me. Why did they write it as though 14 is bigger than 33. It feels so transparent that they had to do this because if they phrased it in a natural way they might possibly have appeared to be ceding ground to the "girls have it worse" crowd.