Zompist Bboard Again

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 1:37 pm Thank you! But how can someone mistake several chemical substances for one chemical substance?

The general answer to this question is "very easily". It's common for two molecules to have very similar properties, so that they're hard to separate. Even if they have different properties, separating them completely may not be easy (e.g. a mixture of 96% ethanol and 4% water has a fixed boiling point, so it's impossible to get pure ethanol by distillation).

In this case, it's even worse because we aren't talking about pure chemistry: we're talking about molecules that are necessary for human bodies, and human bodies are complex. The discovery of vitamins is linked to the study of food deficiencies: why does eating lemons prevent sailors from getting scurvy? Because lemons contain a molecule necessary for human life (vitamin C, also called "ascorbic acid" which literally means "acid that prevents scurvy"), and the typical sailor diet was otherwise low in this molecule.

In this case, all vitamins in the B group tend to occur in the same kinds of foods. Casimir Funk discovered that some kinds of food helped prevent beriberi, and he assumed that they contained a molecule necessary for human life, which he called a "vitamin". He was only half-right, because they actually contained several of them.

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 1:37 pm Thank you! But how can someone mistake several chemical substances for one chemical substance?

Because initially they were defined by extraction and elimination processes that were insufficiently specific. Even now, the precise vitamins come in various forms rather than being specific chemicals. In the case of vitamin B, the different vitamins come from much the same foods.

Thank you both!

It's easy to forget how recent our modern notions of atoms and molecules are. Humans have done chemistry for millenia without having a clear notion of them. Our modern notion of "chemical element" comes from Lavoisier's work around 1780, and the works of John Dalton[*] and Jöns Jacob Berzelius led to the notion of molecule. Through the XIXth century, chemists were able to figure out the number of atoms in various molecules, and to some extend their structure, even though they had no idea what an atom's weight was, only their relative weight. The works of Jean Perrin allowed scientists to know the size of an atom in 1911.

Nowadays, students are shown molecular models in their first chemistry class. But these models come from hard-won knowledge.

[*] The same guy also worked on colorblindness: he was green-red colorblind himself. The condition is still called "daltonism" in several languages.

Yeah, I once read that, generations after most chemists had accepted models of atoms and molecules, many physicists still argued that, since you couldn't directly observe atoms, it would be wrong to assume that they exist.

By the way, Ryusenshi, you seem to know a lot about both information technology and chemistry. Is there anything you don't know that much about?

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:31 pm By the way, Ryusenshi, you seem to know a lot about both information technology and chemistry. Is there anything you don't know that much about?

Well, I know less about linguistics than 95% of this board.

Silly question: has there ever been an episode of Doctor Who in which the Doctor let the dogs out?

Raphael wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 1:38 am Silly question: has there ever been an episode of Doctor Who in which the Doctor let the dogs out?

the dogs of war, certainly...other than that, I'm not sure when we saw NuWho let the dogs out.

(7th Doctor had some interactions with Fenris, if that counts)

Youtube is pushing creators to embrace the new format called shorts: roughly one minute videos that are almost always vertical, carry fewer features, and auto-loop. Yes, you guessed correctly; it's trying to be like TikTok. Apparently Google thinks the thing people like about TikTok is the underdeveloped UI, and not, you know the ability to use copyrighted music to your heart's content. Youtube's policy of sending Navy Seals to your house after you hum two bars of Taylor Swift is still in place, and TikTok continues to be the entirety of the internet for anyone under 20.

Thank you, keenir.

Moose-tache: Has the "let's do almost exactly the same as what someone else is already doing" strategy ever worked out for anyone? I mean, aside from the countries that copied Britain by industrializing?

Raphael wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:35 am Moose-tache: Has the "let's do almost exactly the same as what someone else is already doing" strategy ever worked out for anyone? I mean, aside from the countries that copied Britain by industrializing?

Well, there's the old adage that it's usually not the first guy who tries to commercialise an idea who makes the money, but the second or third imitator. And there's the Samwer brothers right here in Germany who got rich by copying internet company ideas that were succesful elsewhere. Whether it makes sense to imitate someone who already is the number one in your market, well, that's a different question. It may at least stem the bleeding.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 6:31 am Youtube is pushing creators to embrace the new format called shorts: roughly one minute videos that are almost always vertical, carry fewer features, and auto-loop. Yes, you guessed correctly; it's trying to be like TikTok. Apparently Google thinks the thing people like about TikTok is the underdeveloped UI, and not, you know the ability to use copyrighted music to your heart's content. Youtube's policy of sending Navy Seals to your house after you hum two bars of Taylor Swift is still in place, and TikTok continues to be the entirety of the internet for anyone under 20.

Do not want.

Raphael wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:35 amThank you, keenir.

welcome.

Moose-tache: Has the "let's do almost exactly the same as what someone else is already doing" strategy ever worked out for anyone? I mean, aside from the countries that copied Britain by industrializing?

Well, there is always the Cherokee syllabary.

hwhatting wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 9:54 am

Raphael wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:35 am Has the "let's do almost exactly the same as what someone else is already doing" strategy ever worked out for anyone?

Well, there's the old adage that it's usually not the first guy who tries to commercialise an idea who makes the money, but the second or third imitator. [...] Whether it makes sense to imitate someone who already is the number one in your market, well, that's a different question.

This is basically how capitalism works (when it works): if a firm is successful by marketing an invention / building a department store / selling hamburgers / making people pay a fortune for coffee / making superhero movies / replacing employees with part-timers, other firms rush to do the same thing.

It happens so much that there are indeed cases where the previous #1 was dethroned. Microsoft was famous for this, burying Lotus 1-2-3 with Excel, and Netscape Navigator with Windows Explorer. In car rentals, Hertz is now smaller than Enterprise. Walmart dethroned Sears. Marvel got way bigger than DC. And so on.

The key difference is that Marvel can make a better superhero movie than DC, in the sense that whatever audiences want, Marvel can feasibly give them. If Marvel was dedicated to only making silent films, or only filming on Gen-1 iphones, this would not be possible. Youtube is either unaware or unwilling to admit that the single, solitary reason TikTok is popular is because it operates under Chinese law, which Youtube is not willing to do. It's as if the executives at Keebler decided "Say, fellas, that crack cocaine sure is popular stuff. What if we made rock candy that you can smoke in a pipe? Of course, we wouldn't include any ingredients that are illegal to sell in the US, but I'm sure our product will scratch the same itch due to its similar color and texture."

Our logo, created by the talented Christopher Horst (who also designed the logos for Archspire and Slaughter to Prevail, the latter of whom we've actually shared a stage with):

Man in Space wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 9:49 pm Our logo, created by the talented Christopher Horst (who also designed the logos for Archspire and Slaughter to Prevail, the latter of whom we've actually shared a stage with):

More: show

Seems like the logo a very god fearing christian pop group. It's even got art deco skyscrapers.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 8:25 pm The key difference is that Marvel can make a better superhero movie than DC, in the sense that whatever audiences want, Marvel can feasibly give them. If Marvel was dedicated to only making silent films, or only filming on Gen-1 iphones, this would not be possible. Youtube is either unaware or unwilling to admit that the single, solitary reason TikTok is popular is because it operates under Chinese law, which Youtube is not willing to do. It's as if the executives at Keebler decided "Say, fellas, that crack cocaine sure is popular stuff. What if we made rock candy that you can smoke in a pipe? Of course, we wouldn't include any ingredients that are illegal to sell in the US, but I'm sure our product will scratch the same itch due to its similar color and texture."

I dunno man Birds of Prey was the most entertained i was at a superhero movie. Granted i only started watching them recently and have seen a total of 4 (5 if you count the Joker which isn't really a superhero movie but it's a bad extraction of the elements of one namely The Dark Knight) but the main difference i see is that DC doesn't produce them as consistently as Marvel does so less for the consumer. From what i've seen they're more unorthodox then the Marvel ones i've seen with Birds of Prey feeling quirky and The Batman being the other half of the bad takes on The Dark Knight while Marvel ones are more generic see Doctor Strange: Multiverse of Madness (which has good action) and Thor: Love and Thunder (which doesn't even have good action).

Also for an alternate perspective i asked my brother (who's watched a lot more superhero movies) and expected to get a different answer but apparently he thinks The Batman is the best movie he's seen of them so far and he agreed with me that the Marvel ones sucked.

I think you may have misunderstood me. I cannot begin to communicate how much of a shit I do not give about the relative merits of DC or Marvel superhero movies. My point is that, theoretically, there is nothing that makes it impossible for either studio to make movies that match or exceed the popularity of movies from the other studio. Youtube has self-imposed legal obligations that preclude any direct competition with TikTok, therefore this direct competition will not happen.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:01 pm I think you may have misunderstood me. I cannot begin to communicate how much of a shit I do not give about the relative merits of DC or Marvel superhero movies. My point is that, theoretically, there is nothing that makes it impossible for either studio to make movies that match or exceed the popularity of movies from the other studio. Youtube has self-imposed legal obligations that preclude any direct competition with TikTok, therefore this direct competition will not happen.

Good point anyways my favourite part about Shorts is it makes short videos unwatcheable now since they go through a weird filter which tries to fit them into the new Shorts thingy. Very convenient and apparently to do with legal issues.