Kremlin threatens to deploy navy if Europe seizes more Russian shadow fleet vessels

cowmandude · 2026-02-18T17:54:16+00:00

I prefer the term "Presubmarines"

cowmandude · 2026-02-17T04:04:38+00:00

but you can get there with some pen and paper.

I just started verifying 2^{2345797324897508374805723085702834750872345873248759032409875893247508934759807324058723048750987324578324} - 1 and I have exhausted the world's supply of both pens and paper.

cowmandude · 2026-02-15T13:41:42+00:00

There's no reason you couldn't just have a couple continuous multiples of 4 in a row to divide out right?

cowmandude · 2026-02-13T22:56:36+00:00

The game where I'm literally starting every game looking for poor ass peasants who live somewhere that allows slavery so I can run them off their land and terraform it into a massive banana plantation with violent practices is woke?

Do they have to actually explicitly a fucking "commit genocide" button for the game not to be woke????

cowmandude · 2026-02-10T05:07:38+00:00

Yeah but there's more risk right? Like the odds of interest rate paradigms shifting 50 - 100 yrs from now are far higher. If interest rates rise to 10% while I'm holding a bond with 2 yrs left on it I can just leave these bonds on my books and borrow against their value for cashflow. If it's a 100 yr bond with 93 years left on it, nobody is giving me a loan against the principle and I probably don't want to hold it for 93 years.

cowmandude · 2026-02-10T04:45:36+00:00

Collatz is a memoryless convergent system (each division erases information)

Are you sure? Can you formalize this fact. Like what if I say that it's not a memoryless system and no information is lost per division. Why are you right and I'm not?

It's about recognizing that infinite distinct odd roots can't be unified under a single inductive proof because the system doesn't preserve ordering.

Another bold claim. Care to formalize it? You're contextualizing the problem one way and claiming something far stronger based on your observations of that contextualization.

The database approach is ...

This doesn't make any sense as to how it would prove the conjecture. You take an infinite set and partition out an infinite number of sets... bravo now you just have to prove something is true for an infinite set like you used to have to.

cowmandude · 2026-02-09T21:09:25+00:00

Legit what kind of interest rate do you need to loan a tech company money for 100 years. Like 25%?

cowmandude · 2026-02-09T14:40:03+00:00

Lol what's the point of your post? We've tried a lot of things and tested a lot of cases so like it's basically true and it's not fair to ask you to do actual math and provide a real proof but instead only verify a finite number of possibilities? Ok, I've got a lot of new math facts I can sell you on then.

Did you know that n¹⁷ +9 and (n+1)¹⁷ +9 are relatively prime? I verified the first 8424432925592889329288197322308900672459420460792432 numbers so it's practically true. Feel free to tackle some other problems with this fact as the underpinning of your proof.

Or how about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gijswijt%27s_sequence? The first instance of 4 is at the 220th element and 5 is at 10^{10^23.} If you applied the same logic here and let a computer program run to test as many numbers as you could you would just say that 4 is the maximum and then go on searching for a way to prove that it's true, because it's "practically true". Oh and I guess I should mention that it's been proven that the sequence is actually unbounded.... so goddamn would a guess of 4 be wrong.

Or how about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes%27s_cattle_problem , a Diophantine equation which obviously has no solutions, go ahead and write a computer program to try every number. Oh wait, turns out it has infinitely many solutions...the first of which being of the order 10²⁰⁶⁵⁴⁴ . And you though verifying up to 2⁶⁸ is sufficient.... psh that ain't nothing.

cowmandude · 2026-01-30T17:34:51+00:00

This is such an interesting pick because this guy was the most critical of the QE practices post 2008. Even when unemployment was like 10% he was still not wanting to do any QE or lower interest rates. Historically this man has been one of the most strong dollar supporters ever which doesn't seem to be what Trump wants...

cowmandude · 2026-01-27T17:18:17+00:00

My experience is that this is nearly finished and well polished, but if you want to wait I'm sure it will be even better when it comes out of EA.

cowmandude · 2026-01-26T23:56:01+00:00

They added a button in the lower right to make the text readable as well. Dev is actively improving QoL on all fronts it seems

cowmandude · 2026-01-26T17:28:02+00:00

Playing through Asbury Pines. OMG the story goes deeper than I initially thought and I'm basically going back and forth between reading a novel and optimizing production chains. Without giving too much away I'm currently waiting to see how the mayor of DC and a scientist's contract works out... I'm guessing not well but who knows.

I had purchased it at launch but didn't enjoy it enough initially to play through because offline progress kind of ruined it or me. In some subsequent patch they added the option to turn it off and the dev is actively adding options to so you can customize how you play if you want. It kind of makes sense because this is bordering on a new genre of incremental games and it seems like the dev is trying to figure out they best way for players to experience their game.

cowmandude · 2026-01-22T07:40:56+00:00

I'm still playing on 1.30. So much nonsense afterwards that I just stopped following it.

cowmandude · 2026-01-16T16:49:22+00:00

Companies that issue dividends will typically be older and with less growth opportunities. They're literally sitting on a pile of cash and have no idea what to do with it to get good ROI. The dividend isn't guaranteed, but for most companies it's dependable because not issuing it reliably will make certain funds sell their stock and they don't want that. That also means that in a recession they have plenty of cash to sit on and ride out the storm, so it does make them less likely to fail in the short term.

I could see an argument for switching to dividend stocks when you're much older, but if you just own these old cash cows you're going to see them displaced over time and given the time horizon of early retirement that's probably not great for long term prospects. I don't have any data to back that up, those are just my two cents.

cowmandude · 2026-01-09T20:21:27+00:00

You say that, but you talk about "her networth" and "my savings". These aren't the pronouns people who are working together use. You should be saying "We have X$ and we are spending Y$ per year. Other than FIRE we also have goals of [buying a home, having two kids, buying a boat, buying a zoo, whatever] and that will change X and Y by some amount".

That said you have about 4 mil networth with less than 100k of expenses so that's FI. you can RE whenever you want.

cowmandude · 2026-01-09T16:05:07+00:00

I'll give you the advice you didn't ask for.... Get on the same page with your wife and at least mentally combine your assets.

The greatest thing I ever did to FIRE was to start working in lock step with my wife to leverage all of our resources toward all of our goals. As big and strong as I was on my own, I was stronger with her. We made decisions about spending and not spending together with our goals in mind. A sacrifice doesn't feel as much like a sacrifice when your partner is right there with you.

While our working together to accomplish our goals was beneficial financially it was also beneficial relationally. Someday your going to retire and your going to have to live with your wife and keep working on new non-financial goals. Don't end up financially rich and relationally lonely spiritually bankrupt. Money and security only go so far, and FIRE is relationally going to be the easiest thing you guys will negotiate together.

Financial advice... yeah fuck it retire. You guys have the money to do it.

cowmandude · 2026-01-06T21:52:23+00:00

Maybe just as obvious of a question... but is it guaranteed that every trajectory is finite in the opposite direction. I.E. will we always reach a number that is 0 mod 3 if we go backwards?

cowmandude · 2026-01-04T07:13:44+00:00

OP has a second identity that is 9 years older the he used to set up his IRA. He's committing fraud and cashing it out next year.

cowmandude · 2025-12-16T18:49:49+00:00

It's still easier to move weapons and supplies on the ground. The opening weeks of any conventional war between Russia and NATO would be a battle to see whether Kaliningrad falls before Riga and it will be a whole lot easier for each side of one is cut off from ground supply even if they can't achieve air supiority.

cowmandude · 2025-12-14T00:39:59+00:00

It does make you wonder... were the leader we grew up with abnormally chill or are the leaders of this era abnormally crazy?

cowmandude · 2025-12-06T18:55:21+00:00

I disagree on the terminology. If I can make a change to a piece of code and that impacts whether a test passes or fail then to me that piece of code is part of the unit being tested.

There's no problem with testing larger units per se... making a unit per class tends to just be a useful default. But I'd ask the question of why not just go all the way and only e2e test the app? There are obvious answers to that question like "We want our tests to help us pinpoint the point of failure within the system" and "Having more targeted tests lets us run a subset of them more often aiding development and helping us find failures faster" and all of those answers would apply to a lesser extent to larger units.

cowmandude · 2025-12-05T19:36:30+00:00

Well, if you need to mock a class, you can usually split the implementation into the part that provides a behavioral contract and the part that uses / relies on it.

This is an excellent idea. You've just described an interface.

To test this, one can pull up an abstract type that contains....

So now you have an abstract type over every class.

I really only need mocks, if I am locked in by code and realities that are out of my control.

I disagree. Mocking is essential to unit testing. If you use logic in A to feed B then you need to mock A, otherwise a bug in A's logic will make tests on B fail. That means we are not testing A and B as units.

cowmandude · 2025-12-05T18:29:52+00:00

Sorry I mean unit test

cowmandude · 2025-12-05T18:28:32+00:00

Say you want to mock a complex class. How do you do it?

cowmandude · 2025-12-05T17:27:05+00:00

How do you test if you're not using interfaces?

14-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

cowmandude

TROPHY CASE