Posts

Showing posts from May, 2022

Programming by example

Sometimes I don’t know the function I need to perform a task I want. Often its something simple like; I have two dataframes and I want to create a new dataframe which has all the rows of the first followed by all of the rows of the second. I can for a small example create the two data frames and I can try and describe what I want to find through google, however, often the phrases that I type into google, being natural language, are ambiguous an imprecise of what I’m trying to describe. In this example of concatenating data frames, I more often came across joining the two dataframe by adding the columns of one to columns of the other rather than adding rows. This test of the function I’m currently building passes managing to find the function in the pandas library which concatenates the two objects. This is still very much a pre-useful stage as in the test I’ve had to put the two dataframes in a list as, having found the solution through google

Trying to make a computer

  As mentioned in a previous post I built my own computer about a year ago. One of the issues I have had with using it is constantly being undecided on what OS I should use for it. While my preference would be Ubuntu all the way I have since getting my oculus quest 2 wanted to be able to make use of the graphics capabilities for VR. Unfortunately, to do this I need to be running windows, which for all other tasks I would loth to use. My first thought was virtualisation. Virtualisation is the process of running a second OS on top of a first as if the second os was just a program like any other. This often comes with a lot of complications that simply running any other program doesn't. A lot of those issues come from the fact that what the os outside of the pretty things the use sees is a lot of management of the hardware and of the drivers between the hardware and the software running on the os. Modern operating systems do a lot of work to make sure that software can't access h

The depressing reality of the progression of VR

I once had to write a blog post about VR in my first year of  In my first year of university, I had to write a blog post about VR. If memory serves me correctly it only had to be 250 words, however, as a dyslexic who had chosen CS in part as a degree with few written tasks, I found writing the post challenging. No one is instructing me to write this post and it will be longer than 250 words. Pushing through dyslexia and all that. When I wrote that first post I was arguing why VR might be around to stay this time. I can't remember how I argued the point and I no longer have a copy of the post. What I want to argue here is that not only is VR here to stay but its progression will allow for a society that we will both choose and to us now seems so dystopian it could only be in sci-fi. The basis of my premise is that people would love to go play tennis with their friends but play Wii fit instead. Why is this? Consoles are not cheap, although that is always a relative term. In today'

Legal fairness in disputes with vastly different sized war chests

  I think it's best if I first clarify what I am proposing, what I think it might solve, and then how I feel the problems you raise may be voided. First, the problem I see which this idea would seek to solve is the problem that large differences in spending on sides of a case will inevitably lead to differences in the quality of the evidence and research that can be done on either side leading to the law not being fair. I believe wholeheartedly and very strongly that the law should be fair and everyone equal under it. The premise upon which my plan provides a fairness I feel from what I have heard is currently missing from the legal profession, is that it is far cheaper to find the truth than produce a lie. This is based on examples I imagine such as to report a document is cheap while generating a fraudulent one which is statistically consistent is expensive. The premise is that: “To build a convincing lie is expensive.” Based on this premise I postulate that if both sides have eq

Democratisation of law

There are two thoughts here one is the thinking around the Bugzy Malone song about the gangster who shot his mother. The idea which isn’t well known but was mentioned in algorithms to live by about the idea that violence allows for less violence. It goes against the idea of violence begets violence. It is also mentioned in poverty safari. This is linked to the idea that perhaps there is a way to make small use of the legal system more accessible. A lot of petty violence happens from escalations of unresolved disputes. Waiting for a digital legal system is clearly not something that will help people in the near future. Even with large elements of legal discovery being automated law is still a very manual field. What if you could design a system which allows for automated conflict resolution but that would fit inside the existing manual legal systems. Clearly, this would only work for civil cases criminal cases would have to be left to the system proper. The idea I have for an automated

Popular posts from this blog

Exploring development timing through building a simple trading game

The twelve fold way

THREE.js: minecraft in a weekend