Definitely a repost, but it fits the season

    • CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      42·
      12 days ago

      That would be the symbol\operation called TRUE or TOP or “tautology” which is always true. They’re actually missing quite a few of the weirder ops, including implication and biconditional\iff\if-and-only-if. (Edit: Actually I think XNOR is also the biconditional. I guess pretend like I said “material implication” and “reverse implication”. Fricken booleans man!)

        • CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          6·
          12 days ago

          I truly have no idea and wish I did, haha. It looks like a shorthand for which operation is being followed, maybe like a group theory thing, but I really don’t know.

      • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
        5·
        13 days ago

        I never got why “implies” is called that. How does the phrase “A implies B” relate to the output’s truth table?

        I have my own “head canon” to remember it but I’ll share it later, want to hear someone else’s first.

        • Excel@beehaw.orgEnglish
          3·
          13 days ago

          “A implies B” means if A is true then B must be true; if A is false, then B can be anything. In other words, the only state not allowed is A being true and B being false. Therefore, the only “hole” is the part of A that doesn’t include B.

        • CodexArcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          2·
          12 days ago

          Yeah, that one’s always bothered me too. I think the difference in meaning from colloquial “implication” and logical “material implication” are also involved in the raven paradox.

          So the statement that “all ravens are black” can be taken as “if RAVEN then BLACK”. Is this statement true? If you see a black raven then trivially yes, if you see a white raven then trivially false (via counter example).

          However if you see a non-raven, it is evidence for the truth of the statement because it doesn’t go against it: not-ravens being black-or-not-black both reduce the universe of possible objects without proving not-black-ravens exist.

          Or something like that, I think it’s stupid too. Trinary logic can adopt a more sensible (IMHO) definition of implication that makes A being false always lead to the third value (usually defined as indeterminate or neither-true-nor-false).

        • Speiser0@feddit.org
          1·
          13 days ago

          “A → B” is true in any variable assignment where B is true if A is true.

          It has always been mostly obvious to me.

  • noride@lemmy.zip
    16·
    13 days ago

    Honestly, this meme just legit helped me understand some of the tools in my CAD software.

  • enbiousenvy@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    8·
    12 days ago

    my logic is too weak to be able to make sense why those are they way they are, I just brute force each of them until I found which one I need when working with that in Blender shader nodes.

  • blindsight@beehaw.org
    4·
    13 days ago

    XNOR is so ambiguously named.

    Every time, I’m like: The inverse of XOR? Or the inverse of NOR? Oh, right, NOR is already the inverse of OR, so X-NOR is just OR, so XNOR must be the inverse of XOR.