414 karma · joined April 11, 2018
I’ve made more actual progress and seen more genuine peace in seeing him for 6 months than I did in years of therapy prior. And as you said, a large part of it for me was “I can’t change this about myself, but I know it now and can consciously work around it and communicate my needs better to those around me” and that alone has been immensely positive for me.
This isn't unique to the web, either, adding the verbose flag to most linux file utilities and then operating on a large set of files will be slower than without the verbose flag, too, just because printing to stdout takes time.
Couple that with being a programmer, and I get a lot of mileage out of youtube.
I agree with your co-worker, it is a massive relief to know these issues aren't fundamental flaws of your character, but behaviors attributable to a condition that can be managed, accounted for, and worked around.
The burnout and stress you feel before diagnosis/acceptance is intense, and, for some of us, debilitating. I have been remarkably fortunate to have a job with co-workers who have enough compassion and understanding to let me be honest about how I'm feeling, and understanding that what I feel is valid, though not always correct or in alignment with my logical thoughts. It's been complicated and involved a lot of boundary setting and apologies when I still fail, but that's all gotten easier since I just _know why_.
I'm getting from your reply here that you completely understood my original comment, meaning your comment to me asking about it was simply to provoke this conversation, not to actually talk about my point. Which is interesting, because I'm really interested (some may say eSPECIALy interested) in this topic, and would happily talk to you about it, had your original question been this message instead.
I'm also willing to concede that the autism diagnosis and acceptance is still really new for me, so I'm going through the phase of putting back together who I was and dealing with the fact that a lot of things that I've blamed myself for, for literally years, were simply because of this condition, and that some of my coping mechanisms have in fact been making me worse for a long time. It's weird to re-learn who you are as a person at 32 years old after having felt so sure of it for so long.
Which is what I think leads to these overly long explanations. I've been so misunderstood for so long that I'm literally afraid of it happening now.
Don’t you think it’s weird to ascribe hidden meanings to someone’s words?
Though I notice it in myself very prominently, I think everyone is prone to this kind of mirroring behavior to some extent, and I could easily see someone living in a new region for a while developing a new accent that doesn't sound quite like the one they came to the region with.
The option key on macOS enables all sorts of extra functionality, open some drop down menus while holding it and you'll find extra / more advanced options in some. Or if you option click your Wifi, for instance, you get all the network info for the network in a bigger popup than clicking it alone!
Then, just like an oled has transitors along its rows and pixels for timing and signaling, so too does the CMOS have a 'rolling shutter' effect caused by the sensor having it's pixels sampled row by row, column by column, just like an oled display draws its pixels.
Here's a few sources in case you'd like to learn more, but clearly if a CMOS sensor of a given resolution is constructable, the only thing preventing its OLED counterpart is the actual organic chemistry driving the pixels, which is a large reason OLEDs are better for fine pitch displays like this than LCDs, they can be made this small.
https://isl.stanford.edu/~abbas/ee392b/lect04.pdf https://isl.stanford.edu/~abbas/ee392b/lect05.pdf
I couldn't find perfectly similar cross sections of an OLED, and the wiring will of course vary a bit, but not enough to blow past the limitations of CMOS's precision lithography process.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Cross-section-of-the-pix...
And to give you an idea of how far that can go, Sony has a 61MP sensor that's roughly the same physical size as these displays, but basically 5-6 times as dense with photodiode based pixels instead of oled based ones. Maybe we can't make a 61MP display that size yet, but we can clearly make a 4k one (which is about 12MP, I think...)
Also, thank you for making this code available, but would it be possible for you and Christian to choose a license for it so people can use it? I don't think which license matters all that much, personally, but I can also understand wanting to keep it proprietary, either way, thank you again for all your (and the rest of the Apollo teams') work.
There's only the 4 base pairs in your DNA, so for any given length of base pairs 4^n combinations that are possible to exist. A complete human genome is 3.2 billion base pairs long. So yeah, it's definitely a length vs information density problem.
Though those numbers may seem very very large, they get cut down to size very very quickly. Across all human's, there's very little variation in nearly all of our genome, something like 99.6% of those 3.2b genes are identical between all humans, which leaves 0.4% (around 12m) base pairs of DNA that make you you out of all other humans. We have identified (or at least think we have) some specific regions of those 12m pairs that control certain things, that's what the field of genetics has been up to with things like the Human Genome Project, so, plausibly, if they caught an environmental dna sample that was long enough to identify _which_ gene site they had, and they knew (or could at least guess) what value your genes would have at that site, yeah, they could probably tell whether it was you that was nearby, or at least someone related to you!
I had a friend in college who nearly always solved problems 'backwards' to everyone else cause it's just how her brain worked, like we'd do a standard for(int i = 0; i < length; i++) and she'd have for(int i = length; i >=0; i--) kinda backwards.
I don't question it at this point anymore and just marvel at the mathematical validity of it all.
I have no idea if the above observations are generally true, but that’s been my experience with the handful of parsers I’ve thrown away because they get too unwieldy for what I want.
Imagine a brick wall rendered for a video game vs one rendered for a movie. The one for the game is probably going to be a plane with a couple textures on it because the wall is something that's a background element that the player isn't going to be up close with. Whereas in the movie, the wall is more likely to be made of a handful of individually modeled bricks with much more detailed surface textures because maybe the director wants the camera to be really close to the surface of that wall and pull out to a wider shot, so that means the individual brick you start zoomed in on might have a 4k texture for itself alone, whereas the entire wall in the video game could easily be a single 4k texture since the player doesn't get close enough to notice the missing detail.
Now multiply that level of detail across every rendered thing in the scene, because the director may want to reframe the shot, or you need realistic lighting to sell that a rendered thing is integrated with filmed footage and 'real'. Every little bit of that detail adds more data you have to track. So in my wall example, you might have 2 or 3 4k textures vs literally hundreds for all the bricks, grout, defects, chipped faces, etc of a movie quality wall.