Page 1682 of 2681

Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:30 am UTC
by mscha
WHIZZONGLY...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 5:31 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
New Othercomic!

Wingish sandcastle, Zooman! :) You did well to RUN from the basement.
Awesomeful newpixbottification, balthasar! :D If you do indeed choose to blitz, I think your bicycle would be very helpful. I had some raptorcattish running shoes for a while, and those helped. Watch out for bumpy parts and time vortexes, though.

Rule110 wrote:Megan and Cueball, sittin' by a tree
(Doin') N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
First comes love, then comes marriage,
But not if they're stuck on blank-stare-age.

Perhaps they're just having difficulties reading each other's expressions. Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:02 am UTC
by ChronosDragon
ucim wrote:I had not however passed through Living in a Village, as I popped around using internal links rather than reading chronologically. I have now. Of interest; one unique thing about present society is that this is the only time where any human could have a conversation with any other human, except perhaps at the dawn of man, if such a dawn was through one tribe and "man" was sufficiently distinct at that time. Before radio and telephone, we were spread out too far to have a conversation, and after the colonization of Mars (if it ever happens) the speed of light will be limiting.


Don't be so pessimistic. Humans are remarkably adept at overcoming the shortcomings of physics. I believe instantaneous quantum communication through entanglement over long distances has already been proven, it's just a matter of hooking it up to the internet. And reducing packet loss - 99% deprecation is a bit of a hard sell.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:16 am UTC
by ucim
ChronosDragon wrote: I believe instantaneous quantum communication through entanglement over long distances has already been proven, it's just a matter of hooking it up to the internet.
Well, not quite. "Spooky action at a distance" has been shown. You could look at it as "the information that this particle is spin up has been transmitted faster than light", but that information belongs to the system, not to us. No information from the real world has been able to be encoded into the spin of the particle in question because we don't create its spin, we discover it.
Spoiler:
We check the spin (of paired particles) on one end, and it turns out that the spin is complementary on the other end. Every time. No matter how far away. But wait - there's more! Before checking the spin on the other end, you can run it through a spin-scrambler. This has a certain probability of changing the spin based on its setting. There is one probability curve if the spin was set before detection (i.e. when the paired particles were created), and another probability curve for the case where the particles didn't have a spin until one of them was detected (after which the other instantly acquires the complementary spin). Guess which one turns out to be the case.
It's like having the internet, but no leopards and no screens. Redundakitties all around, but we can't see them or post them.

Jose

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:19 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
ucim wrote:Redundakitties all around, but we can't see them or post them.

Spoiler:
*sad, sad meowlpy*
Image

Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:30 am UTC
by mscha
THONGIES...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:37 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
Excellent question, Cueball.

Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:30 pm UTC
by mscha
BRONGLE...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 1:46 pm UTC
by ttscp
ucim wrote:
ttscp wrote:ucim: I knew about posslq, but for some reason didn't include it in my list of alternatives. I pronounce it as you do, but have never liked it, perhaps because I never think of it when playing scrabble. In any event, I have lost the battle on squeeze; after a few weeks of using it to refer to my wife, it slipped back out of my vocabulary.
I like the word because of the way it sounds. It's lack of adoption however works against it. "Squeeze" however lacks weight, lacks gravitas. It has a sense of "mere pleasure" rather than that of a more long-lasting companionship.
The point is moot, because the world has ignored both of us (a shame; if it listened more to our brilliance it wouldn't be in as bad a shape), but 'posslq' never sounded that affectionate to me and affection is important when you are referring to your significant other. I'll grant you the gravitas, but for me affection trumps gravitas most of the time.

ucim wrote:I had not however passed through Living in a Village, as I popped around using internal links rather than reading chronologically. I have now. Of interest; one unique thing about present society is that this is the only time where any human could have a conversation with any other human, except perhaps at the dawn of man, if such a dawn was through one tribe and "man" was sufficiently distinct at that time. Before radio and telephone, we were spread out too far to have a conversation, and after the colonization of Mars (if it ever happens) the speed of light will be limiting.
There was the Toba eruption, where humanity got down to as few as 40 reproductive females (I assume they back traced mitochondrial DNA to get to that conclusion). Given my dating history, I would have been turned down by every eligible woman in the world.

Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:30 pm UTC
by mscha
GONGLYMUS...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:08 pm UTC
by ChronosDragon
ucim wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote: I believe instantaneous quantum communication through entanglement over long distances has already been proven, it's just a matter of hooking it up to the internet.
Well, not quite. "Spooky action at a distance" has been shown. You could look at it as "the information that this particle is spin up has been transmitted faster than light", but that information belongs to the system, not to us. No information from the real world has been able to be encoded into the spin of the particle in question because we don't create its spin, we discover it.
Spoiler:
We check the spin (of paired particles) on one end, and it turns out that the spin is complementary on the other end. Every time. No matter how far away. But wait - there's more! Before checking the spin on the other end, you can run it through a spin-scrambler. This has a certain probability of changing the spin based on its setting. There is one probability curve if the spin was set before detection (i.e. when the paired particles were created), and another probability curve for the case where the particles didn't have a spin until one of them was detected (after which the other instantly acquires the complementary spin). Guess which one turns out to be the case.
It's like having the internet, but no leopards and no screens. Redundakitties all around, but we can't see them or post them.

Jose


Oh, well that's close enough. I give it 20 years until humanity is skyping with its Martian neighbors at speeds comparable to today's broadband. That is, assuming anyone gets to Mars by that point. GLR knows the Martians don't want anything to do with us.

ttscp wrote:
ucim wrote:I had not however passed through Living in a Village, as I popped around using internal links rather than reading chronologically. I have now. Of interest; one unique thing about present society is that this is the only time where any human could have a conversation with any other human, except perhaps at the dawn of man, if such a dawn was through one tribe and "man" was sufficiently distinct at that time. Before radio and telephone, we were spread out too far to have a conversation, and after the colonization of Mars (if it ever happens) the speed of light will be limiting.
There was the Toba eruption, where humanity got down to as few as 40 reproductive females (I assume they back traced mitochondrial DNA to get to that conclusion). Given my dating history, I would have been turned down by every eligible woman in the world.


That was a rough time. Just goes to show, you humans are basically all one big happy family. Well, "happy" being a relative term. Dragon family reunions make the Vietnam War look tame.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:56 pm UTC
by ucim
Image

I'd have a redundakitty, but I can't get it to state its spin.
Spoiler:
Otter conjectures.jpg

Jose

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:58 pm UTC
by taixzo
ChronosDragon wrote:
ucim wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote: I believe instantaneous quantum communication through entanglement over long distances has already been proven, it's just a matter of hooking it up to the internet.
Well, not quite. "Spooky action at a distance" has been shown. You could look at it as "the information that this particle is spin up has been transmitted faster than light", but that information belongs to the system, not to us. No information from the real world has been able to be encoded into the spin of the particle in question because we don't create its spin, we discover it.
Spoiler:
We check the spin (of paired particles) on one end, and it turns out that the spin is complementary on the other end. Every time. No matter how far away. But wait - there's more! Before checking the spin on the other end, you can run it through a spin-scrambler. This has a certain probability of changing the spin based on its setting. There is one probability curve if the spin was set before detection (i.e. when the paired particles were created), and another probability curve for the case where the particles didn't have a spin until one of them was detected (after which the other instantly acquires the complementary spin). Guess which one turns out to be the case.
It's like having the internet, but no leopards and no screens. Redundakitties all around, but we can't see them or post them.

Jose


Oh, well that's close enough. I give it 20 years until humanity is skyping with its Martian neighbors at speeds comparable to today's broadband. That is, assuming anyone gets to Mars by that point. GLR knows the Martians don't want anything to do with us.


I don't think that's possible. As far as I know, the rules of quantum entanglement make it observation-only (i.e. you can change the spin of one entangled particle, but that doesn't change the other one - instead it breaks the entanglement.)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 7:04 pm UTC
by ucim
taixzo wrote:I don't think that's possible. As far as I know, the rules of quantum entanglement make it observation-only (i.e. you can change the spin of one entangled particle, but that doesn't change the other one - instead it breaks the entanglement.)
Right. Spins are like the sea. They do what they want. Come to think of it, kittens are like the sea too, and they are easily entangled.

Jose

Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:30 pm UTC
by mscha
DONGER...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:47 pm UTC
by ucim
Lotta raptor and squirpy action in those trees - whoever is doing these, besides being a loopist (or just loopy), has put a lot of avianicity into it.

Jose

Add Newpixbots to everything!

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:30 pm UTC
by balthasar_s
Image


The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!
(http://1190.bicyclesonthemoon.dnsd.info/pro/npb/npb.htm)

Now you can add Newpixbots to everything! All you have to do is to enter the URL of the image in the box. Enjoy.
Code can be downloaded from svn://bicyclesonthemoon.dnsd.info/npb (use "e" to login) or http://1190.bicyclesonthemoon.dnsd.info/pro/npb.

@blitzing and bicycles:
I had to replace the inner tube in the rear wheel. I bought a new one:
Image
I didn't know there are special ones for blitzing! It's all RELATED!

Redundant
Spoiler:
npbd.png
npbd.png (267 KiB) Viewed 18351 times

blitztb.JPG
blitztb.JPG (44.53 KiB) Viewed 18351 times


ETA: The server may be down for some time today or tomorrow.
Edited to fix URLs.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:51 pm UTC
by AluisioASG
taixzo wrote:I don't think that's possible. As far as I know, the rules of quantum entanglement make it observation-only (i.e. you can change the spin of one entangled particle, but that doesn't change the other one - instead it breaks the entanglement.)

Can you change it without knowing its previous value? And what's more important, can you detect such a change?

balthasar_s wrote:The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!
(http://1190.bicyclesonthemoon.dnsd.info/pro/npb/npb.htm)

Cool. [plug type="shameless"]But URL too long.[/plug]

Re: Time After Time

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:53 pm UTC
by ZoomanSP
mscha wrote:DONGER...
Spoiler:
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Bag to the future journey!

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:03 pm UTC
by HES
AluisioASG wrote:
balthasar_s wrote:The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!
(http://1190.bicyclesonthemoon.dnsd.info/pro/npb/npb.htm)

Cool. [plug type="shameless"]But URL too long.[/plug]

"newpixbottification.chirpingmustard.com" isn't a great deal better...

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:03 am UTC
by ZoomanSP
THEBEESNAKESARESTILLCIRCLONG...
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:10 am UTC
by lmjb1964
Hi, everymolpy! Just wanted to let you know I'm not in the basement. But I see I have only three pages to ketchup after 4 dips. :( Well, I'll just assume that, like me, everymolp was ties up with family for the holidips. Though hopefully not literally tied up. Anyway, hopefully I'll be able to ketchup todip after rehearsal.

A brief glance in the OTT indicates that exciting stuff is happening in the mystery ONGs--I can('t) wait to see what it is!

Re: Add Newpixbots to Newpixbots!

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:19 am UTC
by HES
Hi lmjb! It has been awfully quiet these last few dips, but I'm sure things will pick up again in the new yip.

They WILL pick up. :evil: *glares at basement*

balthasar_s wrote:The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!

Is there a size constraint? I tried to NewpixbOTTify your NewpixbOTTification and it threw an angry newpixbot at me.

"Newpixbot" doesn't sound like a real word any more.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:48 am UTC
by ggh
Image
Treeish! Newpixbot bakes a lot better than I do! For you!


Cheers for the shared traditions on the last page - I may try to adopt one or two of those. :)
And maybe we can all share the Landing Day festivities next year.

Redundant:
Spoiler:
Image
npbd_cookies.png
npbd-catCookies.png

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:16 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
Some ketchup:
balthasar_s wrote:@blitzing and bicycles:
I had to replace the inner tube in the rear wheel. I bought a new one:
Spoiler:
Image
I didn't know there are special ones for blitzing! It's all RELATED!

That's awesomeful, balthasar! I want blitz tubes, too! :mrgreen:
Also, molpish work on the newpixbottifier, that's very impressive!

Treeish OTTercomic, Jose!
ucim wrote:Come to think of it, kittens are like the sea too, and they are easily entangled.

Spoiler:
*meowlpy tangled up in yarn*
Image
lmjb1964 wrote:Hi, everymolpy! Just wanted to let you know I'm not in the basement. But I see I have only three pages to ketchup after 4 dips. :( Well, I'll just assume that, like me, everymolp was ties up with family for the holidips. Though hopefully not literally tied up.

Yep, I'm with family for most of this wip, and my otting is severely impaired. My molpy army is looking at me anxiously.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:49 am UTC
by taixzo
AluisioASG wrote:
taixzo wrote:I don't think that's possible. As far as I know, the rules of quantum entanglement make it observation-only (i.e. you can change the spin of one entangled particle, but that doesn't change the other one - instead it breaks the entanglement.)

Can you change it without knowing its previous value? And what's more important, can you detect such a change?


You can change one, but any change you make does not propagate to the other one. It's like if you had two molpies, and you weren't sure what sort they were; as soon as you got close enough to one to see, it would spontaneously pick a species (say, squirpy), and the other one would pick the same one; but, if you put a long tail on the first to change it into a molpython, the other one would still be a squirpy.

BlitzGirl wrote:
ucim wrote:Come to think of it, kittens are like the sea too, and they are easily entangled.

Spoiler:
*meowlpy tangled up in yarn*
Image


Do quantum kittens produce Cherenkov radiation?

Spoiler:
Image

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:01 am UTC
by ucim
taixzo wrote:Do quantum kittens produce Cherenkov radiation?
Only when they're sad.

AluisioASG wrote:Can you change it without knowing its previous value? And what's more important, can you detect such a change?
When you create them, they are entangled, i.e. they have will end up having opposite spins. If you interact with one, the other will instantly have had the opposite spin. The spin of the one you interacted with changes due to your interaction, but the spin of the other does not. The entanglement is broken.

Jose

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:14 am UTC
by MistyCat
I'm in a very good mood ready to celebrate this coming new year. Tonight I shall celebrate. Not only do I intend to carve an extra thick slice from my left-over Christmas baked bean, I'd like to share a few sandcastles with all the winners on this forum.

It's not the least I could do, but what the ch*rp, I'm a cat. I'm just not going to spend the extra effort working out how to do something less.

OK, just a tiny bit of effort.

Spoiler:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:43 am UTC
by ergman
I'm in an ottercomical mood:
Image
Spoiler:
no time for redundakitties, but this is redundant, right?
Image
thighs.png
she couldn't resist

Time After Time

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:30 am UTC
by mscha
STRONGULATED...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:04 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
Chirpy landing! Image
Molpish OTTercomic, ergman!

MistyCat wrote:It's not the least I could do, but what the ch*rp, I'm a cat. I'm just not going to spend the extra effort working out how to do something less.

OK, just a tiny bit of effort.
Spoiler:

You have learned well, dear blitzer.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:15 am UTC
by ZoomanSP
BlitzGirl wrote:I want blitz tubes, too! :mrgreen:

Spoiler:
Image
Steakish finding, MistyCat! These are some seaish sandcastles!

Treeish OTThercomic, ergman!

Time After Time

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:30 am UTC
by mscha
SHOPLIFTONGS...
ImageImage
Image
-- posted by newpixbot

Re: Add Newpixbots to Newpixbots to Newpixbots to Newpixbots

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am UTC
by balthasar_s
HES wrote:Hi lmjb! It has been awfully quiet these last few dips, but I'm sure things will pick up again in the new yip.

They WILL pick up. :evil: *glares at basement*

balthasar_s wrote:The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!

Is there a size constraint? I tried to NewpixbOTTify your NewpixbOTTification and it threw an angry newpixbot at me.

"Newpixbot" doesn't sound like a real word any more.

I didn't create any artificial limit. The result is replaced with mpb.png whenever mustard happens anywhere in the NewpixbOTTification process. I got this without problems:
Image
How did you try to do this?

ETA: The server may be down for some time today or tomorrow.
Spoiler:
npbd.png

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:20 am UTC
by OrbitalFacePalm9001
Happy new yip, everymolpy!

Re: Add Newpixbots to Newpixbots to Newpixbots to Newpixbots

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:24 am UTC
by OrbitalFacePalm9001
balthasar_s wrote:
HES wrote:Hi lmjb! It has been awfully quiet these last few dips, but I'm sure things will pick up again in the new yip.

They WILL pick up. :evil: *glares at basement*

balthasar_s wrote:The NewpixbOTTification software is ready!

Is there a size constraint? I tried to NewpixbOTTify your NewpixbOTTification and it threw an angry newpixbot at me.

"Newpixbot" doesn't sound like a real word any more.

I didn't create any artificial limit. The result is replaced with mpb.png whenever mustard happens anywhere in the NewpixbOTTification process. I got this without problems:
Image
How did you try to do this?

ETA: The server may be down for some time today or tomorrow.
Spoiler:
npbd.png

I put the MustardPixBot in an NPB in an NPB.

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:04 am UTC
by BlitzGirl
OrbitalFacePalm9001 wrote:Happy new yip, everymolpy!

Happy dip before the new yip? :)

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:32 am UTC
by ttscp
It's 2014O somewhereC right now: Happy New Yip to all ottersE

O Outside. Inside, it's around 23014. I have no idea what it is in the basement; it's too dark to tell.
C Christmas Island and New Zealand
E and everyone else

Edit: basement

Re: 1190: "Newmustardbot"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:33 am UTC
by HES
Any projections for when we'll reach the newpage of yip?

Re: 1190: "Time"

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:01 pm UTC
by SBN
ttscp wrote:It's 2014O somewhereC right now: Happy New Yip to all ottersE

O Outside. Inside, it's around 23014. I have no idea what it is in the basement; it's too dark to tell.
C Christmas Island and New Zealand
E and everyone else

Edit: basement

In that case,

O T T
Should OTTer avvy's be forgot
and never brought to mind?
Should OTTer avvy's be forgot,
Or days of O T T?

The O T T, my friends,
The O T T.
We'll make a thread with kindness yet,
The O T T.