• 1 Post
  • 38 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 6th, 2024

help-circle




  • There are pros to this:

    If the person you blocked can’t see your posts, they can intuit that you’ve blocked them. Then, they might try and find you on other social media to harass you even further, or shift targets to someone else.

    If they can see your posts, they have no idea they’ve been blocked, similar to Reddit’s shadow bans. This might make them think you’re just annoyed or rarely look at your DMs, making them invest even more time to uselessly try to contact you.

    Of course, I can see the other side too, that you don’t want them to know about any (new) posts you’ve made; but it isn’t as one-sided as you seem to think it is.




  • Huh, TIL.

    Regarding your edit, that amount wasn’t the cumulated cost of whatever Limewire were distributing, that would be idiotic indeed; rather the RIAA tried to call for a ruling that somehow those guys were causing $150,000 in damages - per instance. Now the article unfortunately doesn’t state how they possibly tried to justify that number, and I can’t be bothered to research that myself. Another thing that would interest me is how the plaintiff expected them to pay with almost every dollar on Earth.

    So while I don’t think this had anything to do with “lost sales”, I do agree with the possible fines and damage calculations not being fit for any sort of realistic purpose at all.




  • That could work too, but for many people, being able to dodge/avoid hits is exclusively the DEX bonus to AC, and they believe it doesn’t have to do anything with hit points.

    I’m on two minds about that: On the one hand, it’s true that you’re far better at dodging in lighter (or no) armor. OTOH, I agree with you that experience teaches you to decide where you’re going to get hit if at all. So it might be something like “raise your arm so the strike doesn’t hit your belly”.









  • But you just completely ignored everything I said in that comment.

    Mathematically, that is precisely how O notation works, only (as I’ve mentioned) we don’t use it like that to get meaningful results. Plus, when looking at time, we can actually use O notation like normal, since computers can indeed calculate something for infinity.

    Still, you’re wrong saying that isn’t how it works in general, which is really easy to see if you look at the actual definition of O(g(n)).

    Oh, and your computer crashing is a thing that could happen, sure, but that actually isn’t taken into account for runtime analysis, because it only happens with a certain chance. If it would happen after precisely three days every time, then you’d be correct and all algorithms would indeed have an upper bound for time too. However it doesn’t, so we can’t define that upper bound as there will always be calculations breaking it.