• 0 Posts
  • 50 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2023

help-circle

  • Oddly enough, on a computer, I have not seen secant, cosecant, or cotangent.

    I have seen sin, cos, tan, arcsin, arccos, and arctan.

    Though the arc functions will only have one parameter, so if this is homework, you’ll probably be avoiding the arcs and using secant and friends

    Anyways:

    sin ( angle )

    Term In this example
    Parameter Angle is the parameter. It’s in radians, so in Java you’ll use a conversion like Math.toRadians(a) on whatever number you’re going to use as an argument
    Argument If I were to call sin(Math.PI / 4) then I would be passing the argument π / 4 to the function.
    In other words, if a parameter is a question, then an argument is an answer. If a parameter is a coin slot, than an argument is the coin you choose to insert.
    Operation An operation is practically synonymous with “function”. It is performed on inputs to arrive at an output. However, usually in code, I hear “operation” used to describe things like /, *, and +. Things that have multiple inputs and a single output, all of the same form.

    If someone is asking you, "which operation should you use in the body of function sin ( hyponetuse, opposite ) then I imagine the expected answer would be, / because

    1. / is an operation, and because
    2. opposite / hypotenuse will perform the division that yields the sine of whatever triangle those two sides belong to.

  • An algorithm is the meat of a function. It’s the “how.”

    And if you’re using someone else’s function, you won’t touch the “how” because you’ll be interacting with the “what.” (You use a function for what it does.)

    You will be creating your own algorithm by writing code, however. Because an algorithm is just a sequence of steps that, taken together, constitute an attempt at achieving an objective.

    Haus is saying all the little steps that go into approximating sine occur directly on the hardware.


  • It sounds like you were distressed and left because you didn’t know what to do or how to help.

    That’s empathy. Feeling uncomfortable when you see people in pain is empathy. And it’s normal. It’s normal for you to feel distressed around her as you hear her account. It’s normal to want to leave. It’s normal to feel guilty about leaving. It’s normal to wonder if you could have done more to help catch the bastard.

    This is awful. What you just saw is awful. What you just experienced is legitimately uncomfortable.

    And it’s hard for people to wrap their heads around, because how could your pain be valid when it’s a response to seeing someone in “real” pain? How could your pain be important when it’s nothing more than the faint echo of the pain you’re witnessing someone else go through?

    But it hurts. As selfish as it feels to hurt at a time like this, it still hurts.





  • OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.onetoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlWhy did you vote for Biden?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    But now I live in Nevada. I will be voting for Biden because

    • the CHIPS Act is going to put chip manufacturing at the mercy of union labor
      • and with the solidarity whipped up by places like Antiwork? It’s going to be a bloodbath.
    • his bans on slave labor solar panel imports will do the same thing. Union laborers won’t need to compete with slave owners.
    • he halted ICE worksite immigration raids, which were basically used to terrorize migrant workers and keep them complacent (hence lowering their wages, and by extension, lowering the market price of labor)
    • he “played the long game” and helped win rail workers those sick days they were fighting for.
    • he kept student loan payments paused for the first 33 months of his term and tried to get a decent chunk forgiven
    • he appointed trust-busting advocate Lina Kahn to the FTC, where she is now a chairwoman
    • he appointed pro-labor lawyer Jennifer Abruzzo to the NLRB, where she recently set an anti-union-busting precedent that, according to Harold Meyerson at Prospect.org, “makes union organizing possible again”

    He’s silently, steadily, baby-stepping us in the right direction. And that’s worth a vote of support, not just a vote for a lesser evil.


  • OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.onetoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlWhy did you vote for Biden?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I didn’t. I was in California, so my vote was irrelevant anyways. I’ve been living with my mom, so I decided to use it to make a point.

    I was like, “look Mom! I don’t approve of Biden’s hair sniffing, so I’m voting for Jorgenson! You can do the same! That’s an option!”

    It didn’t work. She voted for Trump. (Don’t worry. She was also in California so her vote was also irrelevant). You’d think with her personal history, she’d have been AGAINST serial sexual predators… but I guess his cult of personality was just too strong. She still genuinely believes he “stood up to the globalists.”










  • Oh yeah, certainly. And one of the first steps in that direction – the corporate death sentence – is just common sense.

    (The corporate death sentence is basically “any company that does more damage than it can reasonably repair gets converted into a co-op controlled by its workers / victims. The investors’ shares get dissolved.”)

    I don’t think anyone would have a reasonable objection to allowing the voters of East Palestine, Ohio and the workers for Norfolk Southern to elect all of the company’s board members from here on out. And I don’t think anyone would weep for Norfolk Southern’s shareholders if their shares got dissolved.


  • There’s a lot of trouble with definitions regarding capitalism. (I’d call them intentional since muddying the waters serves the people who benefit from our current system.)

    Pick any person who is complaining about “capitalism” right now.

    If you proposed a system where everything was structured the same as it is right now, HOWEVER instead of shareholders and owners possessing companies, every, single company was a worker cooperative (owned and controlled by its workers) then I am 95% sure the anti-capitalist you picked would

    1. Not consider that capitalism, and
    2. Vastly prefer that over what we have right now

    With some minor variation. (Tankies don’t think it’s possible to maintain such a system without monopolizing violence. Anarcho-communists wouldn’t be too happy about the scope and financial power of state and federal governments, and would seek to pare them down. Democratic socialists would think it was perfect. Little disagreements like that.)

    But I think most other people (people who aren’t anti-capitalists) would think “that’s just a form of capitalism” if I described the above.

    In fact, if I said,

    A free market system, but ownership and control of the means of production is only allowed collectively and democratically. No shareholders allowed, no transferable individual ownership allowed.

    Most ordinary people would consider that a form of capitalism. (Even though calling it capitalism is, technically, highly inaccurate). So it’s a difficult conversation to have. Because most “anti-capitalists” disagree with most “pro-capitalists” on the basic definition of what they are fighting or defending.

    I’m actually convinced that a lot of “pro-capitalists” are more eager to defend the free market system than they are to defend transferable, stock-marketable, individual ownership of the means of production. I think they would compromise on the latter if they could safeguard the former.