• bishbosh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    Valid and this is very certainly my math bias poking through. Though I think to consider the false case of a gender binary, the 1-bit value being M or F would suggest it’s describing the scope of gender expressions in memory values, and this interpretation seems to continue with the meme of it needing to be a 64-bit gender. So in correcting that falsehood, it would be a the space that have spots for all possible gender expressions.

    While I agree the tautological approach of person['gender'] = "{Person's gender}" would accurately label all genders, I think the radical point to make is that the space itself is the confining factor. My point being the systems needed to properly represent a gender expression can only be approximated with finite discrete systems.

    Agreed the difficulty of describing the gender space even would be near impossible! I always say the simplest way I can describe mine is: Aeiαt|💪> + Beiβt|💅> + Ceiγt|🤖>

    |💪>, |💅>, and |🤖> of course being the base vectors I find most useful as invariant under my transformation.

    Though, to ramble a bit

    Please, this is a very serious conversation about very serious things like an n-dimensional gender hyperspace! Please refrain from nonsensical ramblings.

    I guess the real question is, what would best represent your eigenvectors?

    • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      You’re 100% right that is the most logical extension from the basis of 1 bit m-f - I completely overlooked that!

      I’m glad to stumble upon someone on the internet who has the same crossover of programming, math, and gender (so unlikely! I know!) as well as silly humour in this regard :D