Write a short lecture about something that's interesting to you.

[Watermelanin]

Most of us probably know a decent bit of info about a subject that most others don't know a damn thing about. Now's your time to let the autism flow and produce a wall of text about your particular interest:

Spoiler: My contribution:

PID loop control is a method with which you can produce a self-correcting system such as cruise control or to create a stable platform on an unstable surface:
The basic principle by which it works is by measuring the state the system is in (the "process variable" or PV) and comparing that to the desired state (the "setpoint" or SP) to calculate the error (E) which signifies the difference between the two. This "E" then gets multiplied by the Proportional (P), Integral (I), and Derivative (D) variables which are set by those calibrating the system to get a "Manipulated Variable" (MV) which is applied to the PV in order correct the error in the most desirable manner for the system at hand. The equation for this system looks like this (lifted from wikipedia because lazy):

Obviously, P, I, and D all correspond to a certain characteristic of the tuning method:

P is the most straightforward: You take the error, whether negative or positive, and multiply it by your P variable and you get a simple correction method where your PV gradually reaches the SP. The heuristic often used to memorize what it is that this part of the method does is that it sees the present (what is the error right now?). The problem with this alone is that the MV becomes weaker as you approach your SP. This often results in a condition where the MV is so negligible that it fails to have an impact on your PV even before the SP is reached. This consistent, unchanging error is known as "offset."

I is the final solution to the offset problem: You take the sum of all errors that the system has measured each scan cycle and multiply it by your I variable. This means that the MV will get stronger the longer the error persists. The heuristic often used to memorize what this part of the method does is that it sees the past (what error have you seen historically?). PI can work together in some cases, but the problem is that the MV grows exponentially when I is applied. This can lead to an aggressive overshoot and undershoot of the PV in relation to the SP as it seeks to find a happy medium.

D is intended specifically to combat this undershoot/overshoot issue: By calculating the difference between the last measured error and the current error, you get a slope which shows how fast the PV is approaching the SP. The heuristic often used to memorize what this part of the method does is that it sees the future (where is the error going?). With the addition of the D correction, the MV will always push the PV towards the SP while minimizing overshoot and undershoot.

Here's a gif that sums up what each of these do in a graphical model:

How you would tune a given system (what your P, I, and D values are) depends on the system itself. I myself have been trained on two of them:
Ziegler–Nichols is a very aggressive tuning method. It will bring you to your setpoint ASAP but there WILL be some over/undershoot.
No Overshoot is exactly what it says on the tin. It takes much longer to get you to your SP, but you know it will never go beyond that.

As an example of how badass this shit can be:

 

[Trump's Chosen]

My expertise is worth money and can make you money. Pay me. I'll post a lecture.

 

[SIGSEGV]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux,
is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.
Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component
of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell
utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day,
without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU
which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are
not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a
part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system
that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run.
The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself;
it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is
normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system
is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux"
distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

 

[Wraith]

If you're good at something, don't do it for free.
That goes triple of a chick asks you for something.

 

[Pee Cola]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux,
is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.

Is GNU pronounced "GEE ENN YOO", "guh-NOO", "juh-NOO" or "NOO"?

 

[SIGSEGV]

Is GNU pronounced "GEE ENN YOO", "guh-NOO", "juh-NOO" or "NOO"?

It's "guh-NOO".

 

[Never Scored]

Every person must take it upon perself to not allow the internet of things, or as I call it, internet of stings, into their home.
*Eats toejam*

 

[Watermelanin]

My expertise is worth money and can make you money. Pay me. I'll post a lecture.

Interestingly enough, I can teach you how to con gullible retards out of their hard-earned cash. Just send me $500 and I'll teach you first hand.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

Interestingly enough, I can teach you how to con gullible retards out of their hard-earned cash. Just send me $500 and I'll teach you first hand.

Wow it's like my joke, but worse.

 

[Watermelanin]

Wow it's like my joke, but worse.

Give me anything and I'll filter it through excessive amounts of malt liquor.
It's easy; it's elegant; it's cheap... and it has about as much redeeming value as you would expect.

 

[Gilgamesh The Pharmacy]

Suppose that you were sitting down at this table. The napkins are in front of you, which napkin would you take? The one on your ‘left’? Or the one on your ‘right’? The one on your left side? Or the one on your right side? Usually you would take the one on your left side. That is ‘correct’ too. But in a larger sense on society, that is wrong. Perhaps I could even substitute ‘society’ with the ‘Universe’. The correct answer is that ‘It is determined by the one who takes his or her own napkin first.’ …Yes? If the first one takes the napkin to their right, then there’s no choice but for others to also take the ‘right’ napkin.

The same goes for the left. Everyone else will take the napkin to their left, because they have no other option. This is ‘society’… Who are the ones that determine the price of land first? There must have been someone who determined the value of money, first. The size of the rails on a train track? The magnitude of electricity? Laws and Regulations? Who was the first to determine these things? Did we all do it? no it's the person takes the first napkin . And the one who ‘takes the napkin first’ must be someone who is respected by all. It’s not that anyone can fulfill this role… Those that are despotic or unworthy will be scorned. And those are the ‘losers’. In the case of this table, the ‘eldest’ or the ‘Master of the party’ will take the napkin first… Because everyone ‘respects’ those individuals.

 

[Stock Image Photographer]

Suppose that you were sitting down at this table. The napkins are in front of you, which napkin would you take? The one on your ‘left’? Or the one on your ‘right’? The one on your left side? Or the one on your right side? Usually you would take the one on your left side. That is ‘correct’ too. But in a larger sense on society, that is wrong. Perhaps I could even substitute ‘society’ with the ‘Universe’. The correct answer is that ‘It is determined by the one who takes his or her own napkin first.’ …Yes? If the first one takes the napkin to their right, then there’s no choice but for others to also take the ‘right’ napkin.

The same goes for the left. Everyone else will take the napkin to their left, because they have no other option. This is ‘society’… Who are the ones that determine the price of land first? There must have been someone who determined the value of money, first. The size of the rails on a train track? The magnitude of electricity? Laws and Regulations? Who was the first to determine these things? Did we all do it? no it's the person takes the first napkin . And the one who ‘takes the napkin first’ must be someone who is respected by all. It’s not that anyone can fulfill this role… Those that are despotic or unworthy will be scorned. And those are the ‘losers’. In the case of this table, the ‘eldest’ or the ‘Master of the party’ will take the napkin first… Because everyone ‘respects’ those individuals.

Okay, President Valentine.

 

[Absolute Brainlet]

The CIA niggers glow in the dark.
You can see them if you`re driving. You just run them over, that`s what you do.
Fucking CIA niggers.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

Regarding the purebred vs mutt argument, neither one is necessarily better or worse. Purebreds are more specialized, but the trade off is that they're shittier outside of their area of specialization. A great example is Dachshunds. Dachshunds were bred to hunt badgers. That's why their bodies are a weird hotdog shape. So they can wriggle into badger holes like the freakish snake-dog mutants they are and pull the badgers out. No other dog is as good at hunting badgers. In fact, most dogs aren't good at hunting badgers at all. But the trade off is that Dachshunds have tons of spinal problems as they get older and pretty much always die younger than mutts.

Are Dachshunds better or worse than other dogs? Well it depends on what you want from a dog, doesn't it? If you want to hunt badgers, gophers, or anything else that burrows underground, Dachshunds are the dog master race. If you want to herd sheep or just not spend a ton in medical bills keeping your dog alive, Dachsunds are untermenschen. There's no dog "master race" in the way the Nazis believed in the concept, that's better at everything.

A human eugenics program that was fully scientific and realistic, not wrapped in mysticism or supremacist rhetoric, wouldn't involve creating a master race that is better at literally everything. It would breed specialized sub-races of humans. You could breed people with great eyesight and hand-eye coordination to create a race that's better at shooting guns than everyone else, for instance, for your soldiers and hunters. You could also attempt to breed good artists to create an artist master race and do the same with scientists, but that's dodgier because the human brain has a lot more factors that are poorly understood and are less predictable. But theoretically over generations you would create specialized sub-races this way, as certain genetic traits get exaggerated over generations. You would also want to keep a mutt race around for genetic diversity because as other people have pointed out (and I also did with the Dachshund example), the more specialized sub-races are more prone to health problems, genetic defects, and are less adaptable due to their more limited gene pool which also gives them their exaggerated advantageous traits.

I would also like to point out that this is not how the current racial groups were created. The genetic differences between Asians and whites were not a result of scientifically planned selective breeding to improve specific traits, they were the result of random evolutionary chance over millennia and across vast areas of land, which is why any assertions about which race is "better" at what specific thing are dodgy at best. In a selective breeding program, the traits would likely be significantly more exaggerated, as would the side effects of breeding them. There would probably be a big increase in various mental illnesses and conditions, like autism and schizophrenia, among certain groups.

If this all sounds like a sci-fi dystopia, that's because it absolutely would be.

A comment I made in BoxerShorts47's thread about how eugenics actually works IRL (as seen in domesticated animal breeds) in contrast to how it's portrayed by ideologues.

This seems like a good place to share it outside of the kick-the-wignat-autistic thread.

 

[Wraith]

DON'T EVER GIVE MONEY TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
I know, with all the posts I make about how much I hate libs and dems and journalists and stuff, what's the story?
During the 90s when I was a massively amount more naive, there was that republican wave in 1994 as a counter to bill clinton being a sleezeball. Well I got into politics because of the kids murdering each other over pairs of nike sneakers being a thing in 1992, so I thought they would change things. They did, a tiny bit, but proved to be big ass cowards visibly for more than 25 years I've been watching.
During this time I gave something like $35 as a contribution hoping that would help. Oh I was young. What happened? For over a decade an a half I got swamped with bull crap from them constantly asking for more money. Figure, but that wasn't the thing that pissed me off, They would send you these huge packets with surveys on them asking what you think they should be doing. No plans of their own. No record of them doing much, just huge ass packet after huge ass packet. I swear they used up that $35 within the first twelve months of begging in mailings.
Each "survey" would be this generic pos that you know didn't mean a damn thing, and then an encouraging note about how you're helping and we could use the money! OH WOW! EFFFFF YOU!
This continued for about a decade an a half and I never gave the lazy sell out shites another penny. Wraith has a long memory when it concerns cowards. Wraith wants to see some cowards have their nipples tied together as they're forced to watch old CWC videos.

Don't give them money. They're not worth it. They're not fighters. They're not moral. They're not warriors. They're not blood thirsty in order to help those that need it. Loser libs have taken over the party and their only job is to hand over victories to the left while they get fat and bone ugly women with bad hair. These are not men and women. They're nothings.