mirror of
https://github.com/Pagwin-Fedora/website.git
synced 2025-07-18 06:15:41 +00:00
27 lines
3 KiB
Markdown
27 lines
3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
|
|
title: "Micro blogs (1)"
|
|
|
|
description: "a bunch of thoughts ideas and what not that aren't worth of full blogs but that I still want to write down"
|
|
|
|
date: 2023-11-13
|
|
|
|
draft: true
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# You know the drill
|
|
|
|
Same deal as the [speedrun blog](https://pagwin.xyz/blog/speedrun/) putting down a bunch of ideas that I want out of my head but aren't worthy of a full blog.
|
|
|
|
## The entire set plus one more in the set
|
|
|
|
Let me start off where I started off<sup>[[1]](#1)</sup> lets say that someone who we shall name Steve anonymously puts a bounty on themselves which is described as "$1 in addition to whatever money Steve has on their person" how much money should be payed out to whoever collects the bounty on Steve and where would it come from? Well in this case the way that reality works and the set of actors involved constrains us to the answer of "whatever money Steve has on their person" and no more. This answer would correspond to addition being equivalent to the set union operator. That does work but with slightly different context it seems like the answer would be different, for example pretend that a god came down and said "I am going to transfer ten humans in addition to the entire human population to a habitable planet in a different galaxy". In this case specifying ten humans in addition implies that we're transferring a number of humans greater than just the current human population but also ten more because otherwise why specify those ten humans. The problem that I have is how many humans come out on the other side. "Why not just the current population plus ten?" well because transfer implies they already exist and aren't being created in that moment so the number should be the same and also my brain thinks there's an interpretation or slightly different wording where you could argue there'll be infinitely many humans. I'm pretty sure this is a [type 5 paradox](https://youtu.be/ppX7Qjbe6BM?t=2035)
|
|
|
|
## Excel with types/static analysis?
|
|
|
|
So I think I started thinking about this when I rewatched [this Matt Parker video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb2zkxHDfUE). I'm wondering if there's a niche for some spreadsheet software is intended to require the user to specify types for cells or a full sql-esque table or something in addition to doing some nice lints/static analysis like you would see in software to minimize errors. My mind has also feature creeped this idea out a bit to have this program capable of exporting some file package/sql database and an executable so you can have something maintaining the structure of the data while other programs do automated stuff in the hopes that Ludicity doesn't come in for a [drop kick](https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-will-fucking-dropkick-you-if-you-use-that-spreadsheet/).
|
|
|
|
## Footnotes
|
|
|
|
<a href="./#1" name="1">1</a> - I started off in a fan-fic of the stormlight archive where a character I inserted into the story was putting up a bounty for themselves by promising "a shardblade in addition to any shardblades or shardplate $character has on them" rather than with money
|