The ICP-Brazil thing was just a surprise coincidence as I was finishing up the article. I had started collecting my notes on the topic when Entrust got distrusted.
Fun threads to read through:
That's really stupid: they got in trouble for writing down a requirement that wasn't actually a requirement and wasn't meant to be a requirement, in a human readable document, and then not revoking and reissuing those certificates which didn't meet the requirement, which still don't meet it so revoking and reissuing achieves nothing, and weren't supposed to meet it anyway so there's nothing actually wrong with them. Part of the point of having humans in a process is so that they can make sensible decisions when the process prescribes something nonsensical, but Mozilla wants to follow the nonsensical process at all costs.
No that's not what they did. They had made promises about how they would handle issuing certs not in compliance with their CPS then went back on them, after a long history of similar things.
"Hey, just so you know, we did read your brown M&Ms clause, but since last month M&M is running a special promotion where they only make rainbow colours, we got you a bowl of yellow ones instead."
Which is the correct course of action:
"Of course. Thank you for paying attention to the spirit of the rule."
Or: "No, fuck you, show is cancelled."
---
All of the stuff I said happened did happen. The extra context you are providing is irrelevant since it does not change the fact that what happened is stupid and it's Mozilla's fault that stupid stuff happened.
In the past, I have used manim to make mathematical animations: https://www.manim.community/ Manim is more flexible but that comes with some overhead of complexity and learning. Example of some animations using manim:
I couldn't disagree more to be honest, about this post. Animations are good when they provide object permanence, and let you track what's changing and how.
This post linearly interpolates complex functions blindly, which doesn't tell you anything useful, unless the thing being interpolated is an affine or projective transform where that makes sense.
e.g. For complex powers, the most natural animation is to animate the exponent, which will show a continuous folding or unfolding. Here the squaring just looks like the extra 360° appears out of nowhere.
For mobius-like transforms, interpolating the inverse might be better.
One particularly good example is e.g. visualizing equally spaced points on a circle, and their various combinations as roots and poles of complex functions.
The goal of math animation should be to highlight and travel the natural geodesics of the concept space, with natural starts and stops too.
> The goal of math animation should be to highlight and travel the natural geodesics of the concept space, with natural starts and stops too.
> The rest is cargo culting.
A geodesic as I understand it is the curve representing the shortest path between two points in some manifold.
So take one thing that I have found math animations useful for: showing the path of travel of some parametric system. Is that a geodesic? Not necessarily in the cartesian space of the system. I don't know what it would mean for it to be a natural geodesic of the concept space.
For me the goal of math animation is the same as the goal of any math visualisation: to improve understanding and intuition. When I animate something (Which I only ever do for myself) that is why I do it. Am I cargo culting in your estimation?
Let's take another example: Say I do an animation of some sort of force problem in mechanics. I can show the paths of some particles in the simulation and the magnitude and direction of the various vectors vs time. Is that cargo culting? It's definitely not any kind of geodesic. Does it help my understanding? Quite possibly.
In that sense in the blog post you are addressing, in my opinion the position vs momentum distribution animation is really great because it really helps my intuition of how those probability distributions are related and how one would change as the other changes.
Please note that complex powers involve the complex logarithm, which is multivalued, it should be a surface in 3D to really see the whole function. The animation I made is only taking one value of the power
NASA images was the first thing I thought of when I thought of public domain images. Looks like public.work doesn't include NASA images but this website does.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not but AI is next to useless in 3D graphics. Some studios are experimenting with using it for iterating on concept art. I can even believe it if some studios are using it for some background low priority textures.
But for actual production models, AI models do not produce usable model right now. Their topology is so bad that they could not be animated. Even if you just need a static model, the topology is so bad that it would not support making minor fixes to the model.
I think they might be making a joke about how JavaScript can act surprisingly when `+` operator is used with strings/arrays in combination with numbers
This is cool, definitely new to me. I do wonder if this just moves the problem though. As the article explains:
> One crucial requirement is that the counter must be initialized before the first reference to the flexible-array member. Another requirement is that the array must always contain at least as many elements as indicated by the counter.
This means as the array is initialized and updated, you must keep the counter updated with it. Its just as easy to screw that up than it is to screw up the general problem of accessing elements that are out-of-bounds
True, but compile time warnings beat runtime checks every time. Well, as long as people turn the warnings into errors so that they cannot just be ignored.