LadyButterfly she/her@piefed.blahaj.zone to Memes@sopuli.xyzEnglish · 1 day agoCan anyone confirm?piefed.cdn.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square144fedilinkarrow-up1943arrow-down112
arrow-up1931arrow-down1imageCan anyone confirm?piefed.cdn.blahaj.zoneLadyButterfly she/her@piefed.blahaj.zone to Memes@sopuli.xyzEnglish · 1 day agomessage-square144fedilink
minus-squarejsomae@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up19arrow-down1·18 hours agoYou sound like the people in my chemistry class who say things like “don’t describe subatomic particles as happy when they’re in low-energy states.”
minus-squareEcho Dot@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up3·9 hours agoWell given the names of quarks I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that a particle could be happy. After all apparently a particle can be strange, so why not happy.
minus-squareSteve Dice@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up12arrow-down2·18 hours agoThere’s no financial incentive big subatomic has for pretending its particles are happy, though.
You sound like the people in my chemistry class who say things like “don’t describe subatomic particles as happy when they’re in low-energy states.”
Well given the names of quarks I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that a particle could be happy. After all apparently a particle can be strange, so why not happy.
There’s no financial incentive big subatomic has for pretending its particles are happy, though.
I’m sure OOP works for big AI. /s
big if true