Koshkin

6 ms·

91.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> apply current Going on something of a tangent: in engineering, it seems unusual to talk about “applying current,” it’s usually voltage (say, across a resistor) or some sort of an “electromotive force.”
92.
by Koshkin 1y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44282191
93.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> we imagine injecting 1 amp of current into a single node I have always had a problem with statements like this. Current is a (measurable) property of an edge, not a node (vertex). One can’t “inject” current into “a single node."
94.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Indeed. In Knuth’s Art the machine code was not the “scariest” part. (Programming is hard.)
95.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> That isn’t much of a surprise, given that six-speeds have been the norm for years. So, not everything is lost?
96.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> 10 times faster than that of Java I was hoping that these days' Java would be "almost" as fast C/C++. Oh well.
97.
Codex Seraphinianus: The Weirdest Book(abebooks.com)
5 points by Koshkin 1y ago|1 comments
98.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Incidentally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_School_of_Mathematics was top-notch
99.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Fields are easier to deal with.
100.
by Koshkin 1y ago
What keeps me from using vi derivatives is knowing that the idea behind it is the result of a misunderstanding. As Joy said himself, “One of the good things about EMACS, though, is its programmability and the modelessness. Those are two ide
101.
by Koshkin 1y ago
I use “tcc -run” instead. It’s instantaneous.
102.
by Koshkin 1y ago
./plic advent.pli (ERR999)No valid statements in source program (Goes back to reading an article about Common Lisp.)
103.
by Koshkin 1y ago
On the TDA in general, I found this series of articles by Brandon Brown helpful: https://github.com/outlace/outlace.github.io
104.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Speaking of: https://www2.math.upenn.edu/~ghrist/notes.html
105.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> Data doesn't actually live on a manifold. Often, they do (and then they are called "sheaves").
106.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Also, λs and μservices...
107.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Hm... Why? Java seems to be a perfect language in which to understand things at a conceptual level!
108.
by Koshkin 1y ago
Incidentally, NASM makes Win32 programming in assembler a breeze.
109.
Profound Physics(profoundphysics.com)
2 points by Koshkin 1y ago|0 comments
110.
by Koshkin 1y ago
> LLM to generate an executable ... and the job of a programmer will be to explain, in as precise terms as possible, what they need the executable to do. (Reminds me of the idea of programming based on a natural language.)
111.
by Koshkin 1y ago
"Keep at it partner, you'll get there."
112.
by Koshkin 1y ago
The infinite is a convenient abstraction of the finite.
113.
by Koshkin 2y ago
I prefer that to this (valid) C++ syntax: [](){}
114.
by Koshkin 2y ago
COBOL? If such time comes, we’d be lucky to even need the abacus.
115.
by Koshkin 2y ago
I don’t think you necessarily need a mainframe in order to run a program written in COBOL. (There’s also emulation available, to accommodate worst case scenarios.)
116.
by Koshkin 2y ago
“Why horse-driven carriages will never die.” (They didn’t.)
117.
by Koshkin 2y ago
I meant “updates.” The same happened to Windows 2000. Lean and fast at first, it turned itself into a hog.
118.
by Koshkin 2y ago
Houston, TX https://neilsbahr.com/
119.
by Koshkin 2y ago
Category Theory itself assumes the existence of natural numbers. My point was about whether their futher "axiomatization" via a functor makes it easier to prove theorems or make discoveries.
120.
by Koshkin 2y ago
For anyone curious, this is one of the best places to learn about some early Indo-European languages: https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol

More ›