Hello, IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?

  • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    “Since words can be represented in binary, thus as a sequence of ones and zeroes, […], doesn’t that mean that all questions can be answered by saying no, then yes again at some level?”

    How has no one pointed out yet that this is conceptually wrong? Turning something off & on again is cycling the same switch. Solutions to IT problems are setting different bits, which is binary for “using different words”.

    • Get_Off_My_WLAN@fedia.ioOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      How dare you use logic on my computer logic-related shower thought.

      But yeah, I get what you mean. I had that thought at some point after posting. This is why I should probably just keep it in this silly thread and not write any philosophy essays soon.

    • Zorque@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I mean, technically speaking, it’s cycling all the switches. You use one main switch to simplify the process, but it controls all the other switches as well.

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        No, that’s the whole misconception here. cycling a switch means returning to the previous state. Turning it off and on again means going from ON -> OFF -> ON. Software problems are solved by going from one state to a different state.

        • Klear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Software problems are solved by going from one state to a different state.

          Or by moving to Canada.