Clarifying that it’s the output of an LLM is responsible.
Though LLMs are really good at anything related to plain LeetCode problems. There has been so much written about the standard LeetCode problems across so many websites that it’s all heavily represented in training sets.
I had this thought too. My best guess is that it's down to the length of the urethra. Have you ever lifted liquid out of a glass using a straw, by capping the upper end of the straw with a finger? That liquid wants to fall, but that causes the gas volume above the liquid to expand, so vacuum pressure pulls the water upward, counteracting gravity, and also pulls your finger into the straw slightly. I imagine that, for a longer column of fluid, that vacuum pressure is at least a contributing factor to the unpleasant feeling. (Not to mention that, when urinating, that column of liquid is already moving rapidly!)
Male here: it's a lot more manageable if you control it with your pubococcygeal(sp?) muscles, the ones you can also use to control ejaculation. I've had to do this while peeing into a bottle that wasn't necessarily big enough. It still sucks, but not so much due to physical discomfort.
> The perineal muscles are involved in ejaculation when they are involuntarily contracted. The ischiocavernosus muscle is responsible for male erection, and the bulbocavernosus muscle is responsible for ejaculation. By actively contracting the perineal muscles with Kegel exercises regularly, strength and control of these muscles increase, possibly aiding in the avoidance of premature ejaculation.
Uh, yeah. It's surprisingly difficult to find really reputable sources online that directly address it, but you can kinda just try it. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/22211-kegel... "Pelvic floor exercises" is probably the right search phrase.
As a guy I found this article oddly riveting — the author seems super cool for being so candid. But the “pee slowly” thing had me coming to the comments to learn more: is this something ladies can typically do?
I learned—embarassingly recently—that ladies can apparently just stop pissing at will, or slice the loaf for number 1, it's incredible. Once I start going I'm pretty much committed.
I'm a guy but for me it just... takes more time to finish pissing?
Then again I found out in my teenage years that not everyone is able to stop urinating on command, too. Something to do with excessive drinking, pissing in public places, and some friends not being able to haul their little firehoses in before the cops took notice.
Does pinching it off mid-piss hurt for you, as well?
I would say that a primary reason to do it slowly is to not put too much pressure into it, which is true for both women and men. The p-valve involving gluing it on your body, and the tube is soft which can easily get kinks. It can balloon and there is always the risk that the pressure find an alternative way that is not the outside of the drysuit.
I do not find it too uncomfortable myself. The fear of rapture is fairly major one, especially the first time of a dive when your trust in the glue are a bit low. After that you can increase the speed a bit.
Never had that problem. Also male. I used to play games with it in middle school, hopping from urinal to urinal, now I modulate my flow to reduce splashing.
If there are anatomical differences, they're not entirely gender-based.
Yes, that's the obvious (and boring!) answer, that I mention in the introduction and that's in a way the implicit conclusion. But that does not teach us SIMD then :)
Your article isn't really about, though, how to speed up a debug build, and I thereby think you're likely not going to find the right audience. Like, to be honest, I gave up on your article, because while I found the premise of speeding up a debug build really interesting, I (currently) have no interest in hand-optimizing SIMD... but, in another time, or if I were someone else, I might find that really interesting, but then would not have thought to look at this article. "Hand-optimizing SHA-1 using SIMD intrinsics and assembly" is just a very different mental space than "making my debug build run 100x faster", even if they are two ways to describe the same activity. "Using SIMD and assembly to avoid relying on compiler optimizations for performance" also feels better? I would at least get it if your title was a pun or a joke or was in some way fun--at which point I would blame Hacker News for pulling articles out of their context and not having a good policy surrounding publicly facing titles or subtitles--but it feels like, in this case, the title is merely a poor way to describe the content.
If so that's perfectly fine, but I still agree with saurik--the title is rather misleading. The article is mainly about how to speed up SHA (without using compiler optimizations).
I am not sure I understand this and I believe it's wrong and misleading unless I am missing something obvious. Why would it be the case that hand-written SIMD would perform worse than scalar and non-autovectorized code in debug builds?
I’m not sure why compilers generate slow code for SIMD intrinsics when optimizations are disabled. But, it is observable that they do.
Aras and pretty much all gamedevs are concerned about this because they use SIMD in critical loops and debug build performance is a major concern in gamedev.
Debug build performance has been an issue forever for a variety of reasons. The most common solution is to keep certain critical systems optimized even in debug build. And, only disable optimizations for those individual subsystems when they are the specific target of debugging. It’s inconvenient for game engines devs. But, that’s a small subset of the engineering team.
These AI slop accusations are getting redic. Is the problem that I was too through in my response? :P Comes from decades of explaining bespoke tech to artists.
And, the writer of the "wrong and misleading" article I linked was the Lead Graphics Programmer of Unity3D for 15 years! XD
Well, the response really sounded unnatural and llm-ey. If it's not then please take my apology.
I write SIMD kernels and the conclusion drawn in the article makes no sense regardless of the fact who wrote it. I don't doubt the observations made in experiments but the hypothesis that the SIMD is slowing down the code.
The actual answer is in the disassembly but unfortunately it wasn't shown.
I recommend complaining to support if this ends up affecting you. It wouldn't surprise me if they can turn it back on for you (idk if it's likely, but I feel like it's worth a try.)
