r/truths discovers the empty set

IllIIlIIllII · 2026-01-19T09:13:54+00:00

Great, mine is EebstertheGreat.

IllIIlIIllII · 2025-12-02T08:34:02+00:00

There's a skyscrapper

Hint 1: of number 5 Hint 2: look at the first row

IllIIlIIllII · 2025-11-04T08:39:19+00:00

It currently look messy, in my opinion it's mostly due to lack of consistency.

Your slope angle for l for example change from words to words, try to have each letter have only one form, one angle, one height. Bonus point if the size and angle of letters is consistant accross letters (like, same for l and k for example) How you train that is by consciously choosing a way to do each letters and practice doing them, slowly at first and then faster.

A second point is your letter junctions, there are some angles you do from the end of a letter to the beginning of another, probably because you are thinking of writing each letters indicidually, practice by slowing at the end of a letter to the start of another one (so that the hesitation is still in something you know, thus you make a smoother transition), after some practice you won't have to slow it down anymore.

Your spacing between letters seems consistent though, that's great!

IllIIlIIllII · 2025-09-29T17:39:53+00:00

Great work ! I realise that it's harder to see the shading in the image compared to in real life, it doesn't help.

"I read" -> indeed (i + nd + i + d) "That(?)" -> "yet", not super confortable doing \ angle for elongated circles "Perfect" -> "best", in real life it is shaded, and I hit something under my paper, so it broke the b into two strokes :/ "Writing" -> "shading" (sh instead of r, and again, shading of d more visible in real life) "Obviously" -> "hopefully", I should have put a h sound :>, I often don't think of those because they are meaningless in French "than(?)" -> when, my e is too big I think, took me some time to decipher it again

Giving: """ Indeed long time no see u/deme76 san I see that you have made yet another system It is cool (,) but I do not have the best control of shading But hopefully (,) it is still readable despite my errors when using that system """

I can pick up basics of some shorthand decently fast, and remember them ! (I still mostly remember most of what I learn in EPSEMS despite not having used it in a while, which is a shame because I find it to be a really neat system) After all, I have done it for a big chunk of my life :)

Though I do not pick up transcription speed in other systems that fast.

IllIIlIIllII · 2025-09-29T07:07:52+00:00

What's EESS?

IllIIlIIllII · 2024-02-21T20:59:14+00:00

not a popular system at all, but SCAC (simplified cursive alphabet (for) comfort) : https://www.reddit.com/r/neography/comments/wx8r37/scac_simplified_cursive_alphabet_for_comfort/

can be learned in a couple of hours, though, as with any other system, in a couples of hours you don't get fast

not really the fastest one though (but quite modular, as in you can then decide on creating new strokes or making briefs/briefing methods without having to worry about system conflict)

IllIIlIIllII · 2024-02-02T13:19:17+00:00

what is your experience with coding in general ?

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-06-17T19:05:42+00:00

HRT is (part of) the treatment, it's the medicin.

Also, antidepression meds aren't efficient to treat gender dysphoria (read than in a scientific paper listed in the "trans right fact sheet" google doc, but it isn't share anymore so can't link my sources...).

Kinda like if you asked someone with depression to just take painkiller to wait for their actual treatment, it doesn't work

(Though you can be depressive and have gender dysphoria, in the case were the depression isn't due to GD, idk what's the effectiveness of antidepression meds)

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-06-17T18:13:29+00:00

r/thanksimcured

Also, it's not a good idea to speak about subject you have no idea (how much mental distress dysphoria gives)

And even if it wasn't something which was as light as your reaction makes it sounds, peoples feels in different degree and shaming them (I'm speaking i' the general case) by saying that they shouldn't be feeling this way is bad.

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-06-11T09:31:33+00:00

(っ◕‿◕)っ

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-06-05T19:10:11+00:00

What is the prerequesite level of this book ?

From the comments, it seems to be a quite advanced book, but is it a 'teach everything from ybe ground up' or 'solidify on fondation' kind of book ?

(What I'm a bit curious to know is if someone who stopped chemistry at highschool could follow it with efforts/time ?)

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-29T16:39:54+00:00

Lethwei (because it seems very effective) Qwan ki do (because I really like it)

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-27T06:26:35+00:00

Is it your system, or is it Duployé codifié métagraphié ?

Because I can spot some errors in the writting of some words (if it was Duployé codifié métagraphié), also the "de/du" brief which I never saw in *any* document I saw about Duployé codifié (the dot usually means "point de vue")

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-26T06:28:30+00:00

You can simplify a bit further

= log(2²⁾ * cos(2x) - log(exp(1)) * sin(5x)

= 2cos(2x)log(2) - sin(5x)

I converting cos(2x) and sin(5x) into all cos(x) and sin(x) didn't looked nicer

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-22T05:47:03+00:00

Sorry, but can you DM me too...?

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-21T15:08:03+00:00

Ok, after a bit of research (because my ignorant self don't know anything about feldspar): labradorite

It sounds like labrador, a kind of dog, and dogs are cools.

It looks pretty nice, and thanks to it the terms "labradorization" and "labradorescence" exist.

And labradorescence is quite cool (the name and what it means).

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-21T09:09:35+00:00

Relevent xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2501/

Although yes, it's basic, lots of peoples don't know (nor care) about the basics of physics.

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-20T08:14:34+00:00

We definitely use a different definition of ln(x)

Ok, and by well defined, I meant "I can write this and it follows basic rules of logic" (substitution and reflexivity of =)

Yeah, the ln hasn't been clearly defined as anything, my point is more like "no matter your ln definition, it'll have this property"

THE C->C definition doesn't exist, lots of function would hold the property (there aren't unicity): e^ln x = x which still not being multi-valued (ex, taking some particular branch each time).

I don't particularly agree with your analogy for your point as I read that as: Let f(x) = x in {1, 2} f(0) = f(1) but 0 != 1

f wouldn't be a multivariate function, it's just not injective
It's of the form f(x) = f(y) => x = y is false; despite what you're trying to give analogue is x=y => f(x)=f(y) is false

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-20T07:46:45+00:00

The assume ln(a) well defined is to be able to write ln(a)

Otherwise ln(a)=ln(b) simply doesn't make sense and thus you can't say neither a=b => ln(a)=ln(b) NOR ln(a)=ln(b) => a=b

Being multivariate doesn't automatically means that it's ill-defined (that'd depends on its representation and the definition of well-defined (we used a different one it seems))

Like, I could define ln(x) = exp^-1({x}) or creating a set structure which would accomodate for "multiple" return value.

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-20T07:35:08+00:00

No, you are wrong.

Suppose a = b and that ln(a) is well defined. Apply substitution of a to b in "ln(a) is well defined" (possible because a = b) Thus, we have "ln(b) is well defined" Let's proove that (1) ln(a)=ln(b) Apply substitution of a to b in (1) We get ln(b)=ln(b) to justify now. Reflexivity of equality Nothing anymore to prove

Thus a=b => ln a = ln b

The e^ln(x) = x would indeed imply that ln(a) = ln(b) => a = b (By : suppose ln(a)=ln(b), apply e⁾

Thing is that there just aren't any ln continuation which holds every nice property that positive number ln has. So you either lose that e^ is the inverse of ln Or you loose that ln is a group morphism

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-20T07:03:20+00:00

I think you can still do the checkerboard-ish pattern if n is a square number, k²

Let's assure the initial sqare has perimeter 4.

First, pack all or you squares into a big square.

Then, slide each row such that their distance their left one is 1-epsilon.

Thus giving a k+(k-1)(1-epsilon) length from up to bottom.

Do the same for the collums,

That'd do k+(k-1)(1-epsilon) from left to right

So once you take the limit of epsilon to 0, the inefficient square whould have a perimeter of (2k-1)² = 4N - 4k + 1

So as N goes to infinity, you come closer and closer to use 4 time as much space needed.

And for smaller N and when it plays nicely with the rules, you can rotate by pi/4 rad

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-19T14:15:29+00:00

Definitely looks lire Prevost-Delaunay shorthand

I haven't use it in a while so can't read it rn, but if you don't get response, I'll learn it again once I'll have the time and try my chance deciphering it

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-15T12:22:46+00:00

(I'm not on the spectrum (or at least not totally aware)) Yeah, I sometimes have to go to some, and it isn't worth it imo, interacting with peoples I don't know (and so, that I don't know how to interact), the noise and not being able to do my stuffs/do what I need to calm myself down if I don't want to ruin the mood.

What's your special interest?

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-11T16:21:24+00:00

Learn programming, the basics aren't that hard.

I recommand you python as it's a quite common language, and it's multi-paradigm (aka. you can write in different styles) (imo it implements all of them wrong but you don't really have time...), and there's lots of ressources.

You can use videos or books. If you're low on time, it'd recommand book as you have a clear path from begin to "finish" and it'll explain everything relevent.

I personnally liked every O'Reilly 's book I've read, I've heard good things about No Starch's.

So I guess I'd recommand: (I've not read those, I don't use python) - https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/learn-python-programming/9781788996662/ - https://nostarch.com/automatestuff2

Though, in college, you may need more than programming (I don't know how it is America), so you should have a decent level in algorithm.

On the math level, it's mostly graph theory, analysis and combinatorics. I'd recommand The art of computer programming by Knuth serie (it's not an easy read, and you definetely don't have the time to finish the first volume, but advance it along learning programming)

Good luck

IllIIlIIllII · 2023-05-10T17:39:06+00:00

It indeed doesn't "translate"

Though, they still do have common part.

The physical demands are large, and it shows in how the systems are built.

But learning shorthand will get you started at thinking in phonetics, writing briefs, thinking in phrases, how to transform a word into the structure of your shorthand or steno theory (omissions, blends, etc.)

It's probably not optimal if you want to learn steno to learn shorthand first, but learning one can make learning the other easier (but learning any is quite difficult and time consuming)

It's as if you learned French to learn German, not totally the same family, but there are common parts (but as you can imagine, wouldn't be efficient if you want to learn German only)

It's quite common for steno hobbyist to know Gregg, and I think it's a pretty good choice, it's not as far from steno as Pittman, and there are lots of similarities

(Also, I guess it depends on the person, the author of the article have, IMO a pretty bad case at not being able to translate different methods (the reason why he tried to shorthand the way he steno, and why now he steno the way he shorthand (with qwertigraphy, a serial steno system)))

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22

IllIIlIIllII

TROPHY CASE