<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@whitequark" class="u-url mention">@<span>whitequark</span></a></span> yes, I worked on (Open)VMS systems for many years, these were extremely reliable, stable and very few problems in general, I miss it<br />How to do QPSK from ULL FPGA without SDR?</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://floofy.tech/@qualia" class="u-url mention">@<span>qualia</span></a></span> i&#39;m interested</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://not.acu.lt/@ignaloidas" class="u-url mention">@<span>ignaloidas</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://fosstodon.org/@ids1024" class="u-url mention">@<span>ids1024</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@radarskiy" class="u-url mention">@<span>radarskiy</span></a></span> if you&#39;re an IR seeking missile then it is!</p>

<p><a href="https://fosstodon.org/tags/meme" class="mention hashtag" rel="tag">#<span>meme</span></a></p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@gamingonlinux" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@<span>gamingonlinux</span></a></span> reject order, embrace chaos</p>

<p>remember alphachip, a 2021 google paper that claimed that their RL-based methods outperformed the state-of-the-art methods for chip macro placement?</p><p>according to this new meta-analysis, their results dont replicate and are full of errors. there&#39;s also been allegations of fraud 👀</p><p><a href="https://cacm.acm.org/research/reevaluating-googles-reinforcement-learning-for-ic-macro-placement" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">cacm.acm.org/research/reevalua</span><span class="invisible">ting-googles-reinforcement-learning-for-ic-macro-placement</span></a></p>

@dysfun@social.treehouse.systems In the late 19th century and early 20th century, physicists went to great lengths on debating whether atoms and electrons were "real". Today, the condensed-matter physicists just say, "Of course, our quasi-particles are not real, they're mathematical models. If you disagree with our approach, try applying Schrodinger's equation to every individual particle for yourself!"

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@whitequark" class="u-url mention">@<span>whitequark</span></a></span> Yes but it was a long time ago and only for a short while.</p>

In semiconductors, "electrons are real, holes are not?" People have been fooled by textbook writers who start using the term "electron" without defining it first as, "an abstract quasi-particle in condensed-matter physics for modeling the collective behaviors of many particles, not to be confused with an electron in particle physics."