• Aniki@feddit.orgEnglish
    1·
    1 day ago

    i know this meme is quite old but i still don’t agree with it. sex is not about [what other people call “sexual intercourse”]. instead it’s about having a pretense to meet other people. i believe that the underlying dynamic that moves you to go to parties and meet other people is mostly sexual. i.e. you wouldn’t go out so much just to make platonic acquaintances. but once that you’re out, you also talk to other people! which brings communication into society.

  • ToastedRavioli@midwest.socialEnglish
    17·
    2 days ago

    Fun fact: Will I. Fuck is actually the maternal grandfather of Black Eyed Peas member Will I. Am, by way of his mother, Anita Good Fuck

  • bigbangdangler@reddthat.comEnglish
    5·
    2 days ago

    If I’m reading this correctly, then an orgy isn’t an orgy if there is at least one person not fucking. This means that a single camera person not getting any turns what could be an orgy into just a set of sets of people fucking.

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      12·
      2 days ago

      No, it just means that the camera person doesn’t belong to the subset of H that makes up the orgy. You can have an orgy in the same room as someone who isn’t fucking - proximity isn’t an issue.

  • farmgineer@nord.pubEnglish
    10·
    2 days ago

    I really need to refresh my set theory symbols. I haven’t taken that class in… oh no… Almost 30 years

    • TwilightKiddy@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      1 day ago

      ∪ is for “union”, aka “disjunction for sets”, ∈ is for “includes”, ⊂is for “subset”, don’t confuse ⊂ with ⊆, which also allows for both operands to be the same set.

      Difference between ∈ and ⊂ is that former takes an element and a set as operands, latter takes two sets.

        • TwilightKiddy@programming.devEnglish
          1·
          4 hours ago

          I don’t believe the current paper defines a way to describe “bdsm leaning”, but for “bottoms” you can easily define x, x ∈ H, such that there exists at least one h, h ∈ H, f(h,x) > 0 and no h', h' ∈ H, f(x, h') > 0. If the second condition is not met, conventionally x is regarded to be a “swap”, if the first one is not met, we have a “top”. Hope that helps.

  • PlexSheep@infosec.pubEnglish
    8·
    2 days ago

    I don’t like how the pairs $(h, h^‘)$ are implicitly the same as $(h^’, h)$. I think the post confuses the pairs with small sets. Normally, order matters in a pair.

    • notabot@piefed.socialEnglish
      13·
      2 days ago

      The formatting on your comment seems have gotten a little messed up, so appologies if I’ve missed your point, but the paper seems quite specific that the pair (h,h') is not equivalent to (h',h), especially in term of Def 1. For instance, the result of f(h,h') may be positive while the result of f(h',h) is negative or zero.

      • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.caEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        The formatting you’re seeing is controlled by carets (^). Just replace the start and end of the superscript text with them.

        I see this often when talking about exponents: x^2 is less than x^3.

        The superscript needs to be surrounded to work properly: x(x+1) is greater than x(x-1).

        In this case, the effected text is $(h, h^‘)$ and $(h^’, h)$. I’m not sure why the prime notation needs to be superscripted, probably something to do with the formatter that is expectinng $s. I think the correct formatting (at least for me) is (h, h’) and (h’, h).