|
Members in Shoutbox
None.
Shoutbox Search
Shoutbox Commands
/w [name] > Whisper
/r > Reply to last whisper /me > Marks as action Shoutbox Information
Moderators may delete any and all shouts at will.
|
Global Shoutbox
Please log in to shout.
[2017-5-25. : 9:57 pm]  TiKels -- https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/18fe/c363623d36621d1e8bae2d7e1608698ec1a3.pdf[2017-5-25. : 9:57 pm] TiKels -- VraelVrael shouted: oh and look in the intro of the wikipedia article: "Kalman filters also are one of the main topics in the field of robotic motion planning and control, and they are sometimes included in trajectory optimization." hey look I found a master's thesis on this topic from the last two decades![2017-5-25. : 9:53 pm] TiKels -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: TiKels You can try a PID controller PID is an interesting thought, but I'm using stepper motors. It would be a hack-together to try and do that.[2017-5-25. : 9:34 pm]  Vrael -- Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: Iceman166 From the source you posted yesterday: "To say that an argument is fallacious is, among other things, to claim that there is not a sufficiently strong logical connection between the premisses and the conclusion. This says nothing about the truth or falsity of the conclusion, so it is unwarranted to conclude that it's false simply because some argument for it is fallacious." Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: "You presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong." Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: Merely pointing out a logical fallacy is not an instance of the fallacy fallacy. moose ur boppin urself, don't reply to that fallacious crap[2017-5-25. : 9:28 pm]  Moose -- Merely pointing out a logical fallacy is not an instance of the fallacy fallacy.[2017-5-25. : 9:28 pm] Moose -- "You presumed that because a claim has been poorly argued, or a fallacy has been made, that the claim itself must be wrong."[2017-5-25. : 9:27 pm] Moose -- Iceman166Iceman166 shouted: Once again, have you actually read the description of the fallacy on that page or any others? It literally says all that is required is to propose that an argument is fallacious, that is the fallacy in itself. You are making up things. From the source you posted yesterday: "To say that an argument is fallacious is, among other things, to claim that there is not a sufficiently strong logical connection between the premisses and the conclusion. This says nothing about the truth or falsity of the conclusion, so it is unwarranted to conclude that it's false simply because some argument for it is fallacious."[2017-5-25. : 9:20 pm] Vrael -- oh and look in the intro of the wikipedia article: "Kalman filters also are one of the main topics in the field of robotic motion planning and control, and they are sometimes included in trajectory optimization."[2017-5-25. : 9:16 pm] CecilSunkure -- Careful though, online implementations of PIDs are overengineered and shitty[2017-5-25. : 9:16 pm] CecilSunkure -- Basic idea is to use a rolling sum, a difference between current and previous step, and a measure of current error[2017-5-25. : 9:15 pm] CecilSunkure -- TiKelsTiKels shouted: I'm designing a thing that can speed up and slow down at a limited rate of acceleration, how do I detect when I'm going to need to start slowing down? You can try a PID controller[2017-5-25. : 9:14 pm] CecilSunkure -- TiKelsTiKels shouted: Where can I go for good advice for programming/robotics? Stack exchange? ROFL[2017-5-25. : 8:58 pm] IskatuMesk -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: No such thing as "this meta". Meta by definition is not recursive. Meta is about one thing; a stack of length one. your face is meta nerd[2017-5-25. : 8:30 pm] TiKels -- I'm designing a thing that can speed up and slow down at a limited rate of acceleration, how do I detect when I'm going to need to start slowing down?[2017-5-25. : 8:19 pm] Vrael -- dunno if they'll have a good entry for "I need advice on programming/robotics" though, given how general it is[2017-5-25. : 8:19 pm] Vrael -- stack exchange is usually pretty helpful if you have a specific question[2017-5-25. : 7:40 pm] TiKels -- Where can I go for good advice for programming/robotics? Stack exchange?[2017-5-25. : 7:35 pm] Broflamingo -- mmmmmm dank https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/6d9y8k/awww_man/[2017-5-25. : 7:00 pm] TiKels -- Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy: error of attempting to apply Fallacy Fallacy to assert that the other viewpoint is incorrect[2017-5-25. : 5:53 pm] Vrael -- VraelVrael shouted: jjf28 it's a fallacy fallacy in itself, but it's true: when you have to get this meta, you've already lost CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: No such thing as "this meta". Meta by definition is not recursive. Meta is about one thing; a stack of length one. see what I mean?[2017-5-25. : 5:37 pm] CecilSunkure -- No such thing as "this meta". Meta by definition is not recursive. Meta is about one thing; a stack of length one.[2017-5-25. : 2:54 pm] Vrael -- jjf28 it's a fallacy fallacy in itself, but it's true: when you have to get this meta, you've already lost[2017-5-25. : 1:31 pm] jjf28 -- http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy#Legitimate_similar_arguments[2017-5-25. : 1:28 pm] Vrael -- jjf28jjf28 shouted: sips cider trollin so hard, also this is a beautiful shout: TF-TF- shouted: shart we should all thank TF[2017-5-25. : 1:15 pm] *jjf28 sips cider*[2017-5-25. : 1:07 pm] NudeRaider -- As a bonus we'd probably put Iceman in a white jacket and lock him away while he's (rightfully) screaming "But he IS trolling!!!" at the top of his lungs. Please have mercy, jj  [2017-5-25. : 1:04 pm] NudeRaider -- NudeRaiderNudeRaider shouted: jj being accused of trolling? That's a new one actually, thinking about it that would be really clever. Nobody would think jj's even capable of it. Nobody would suspect a thing. Would be the troll of the century.   [2017-5-25. : 1:02 pm] jjf28 -- Looks like I did surrender it earlier: jjf28jjf28 shouted: I'd agree that the bar is not so high that they have to explicitly relate the faulty argument to the opposite conclusion, but there has to at least by an implied relationship https://puu.sh/w0DRl/de4e1c9aaa.png [2017-5-25. : 12:47 pm] jjf28 -- Iceman166Iceman166 shouted: 'Rejected' and 'inferred' bit of a stretch to "Someone would have had to said a conclusion is wrong because the argument is faulty". You can argue all you want man, but you gotta stick to the point. naw, I can change my mind if you've convinced me  [2017-5-25. : 12:46 pm] jjf28 -- Iceman166Iceman166 shouted: "Someone would have to have said a conclusion is wrong because the argument is faulty" Quoting you word for word here man. Gotta stop this trolling Alright, my wording was bad, I'd have surrendered that point and amended my statement - why didn't we start there?[2017-5-25. : 12:34 pm] Iceman166 -- Anyway, I'm done. My initial point was all about how insubstantial this fallacy circlejerk was and now I've come full circle[2017-5-25. : 12:30 pm] Iceman166 -- 'Rejected' and 'inferred' bit of a stretch to "Someone would have had to said a conclusion is wrong because the argument is faulty". You can argue all you want man, but you gotta stick to the point.[2017-5-25. : 12:29 pm] Iceman166 -- "Someone would have to have said a conclusion is wrong because the argument is faulty" Quoting you word for word here man. Gotta stop this trolling[2017-5-25. : 12:27 pm] jjf28 -- Iceman166Iceman166 shouted: You have been doing nothing but making up words what word in specific have I made up? I've screen-capped the exact form of the fallacy and argued that to commit the fallacy you must follow the form[2017-5-25. : 12:26 pm] jjf28 -- you say you quoted exact words... but that quote is not present in the only source you linked, please link your source[2017-5-25. : 12:26 pm] Iceman166 -- I'm quoting exact words, giving meanings, and actually using direct explanations.[2017-5-25. : 12:24 pm] jjf28 -- ne ways time for work, I'll check a few more resources when I get back[2017-5-25. : 12:23 pm] jjf28 -- there is not an implied relationship simply from brining up the fallacy, that is a very common misunderstanding which is why I often explicitly say I agree with the conclusion before attacking the form of argument/persuasion[2017-5-25. : 12:20 pm] jjf28 -- Iceman166Iceman166 shouted: Point to any authority where it says "Person X needs to explicitly say they disagree with that conclusion" jjf28jjf28 shouted: I'd agree that the bar is not so high that they have to explicitly relate the faulty argument to the opposite conclusion, but there has to at least by an implied relationship https://puu.sh/w0DRl/de4e1c9aaa.png there has to be either an explicit implied relationship to follow the form of the fallacy on the very page you linked https://puu.sh/w0EI8/6b00eec451.png , no where did your source say anything akin to "People who call out "FALLACY!!" than do the proverbial mic drop with no desire to make any type of contribution, makes this rejection quite explicit." http://www.fallacyfiles.org/fallfall.html[2017-5-25. : 12:18 pm] Iceman166 -- And so you don't skip on the point once again, the provision in doubt is 'rejected', 'inferred', or its other variants.[2017-5-25. : 12:16 pm] Iceman166 -- So be my guest, provide some weight. These fallacy arguments are toxic and a substitution for lack of substance[2017-5-25. : 12:15 pm] Iceman166 -- Oh and that includes every other website or resource I've checked, there is nothing about "saying X", it has all literally been subjective words like 'rejected' or inferred.[2017-5-25. : 12:14 pm] Iceman166 -- Point to any authority where it says "Person X needs to explicitly say they disagree with that conclusion" |
Members Online: O)FaRTy1billion[MM]
O)FaRTy1billion[MM]