btilly

22 ms·

361.
by btilly 1y ago
The website probably hasn't been updated to reflect the effect of Trump's recent $100K fee for H1B visas. I would believe that current statement over the website in this case.
362.
by btilly 1y ago
The fact that you think I'm talking about the axiom of choice, demonstrates that you didn't understand what I'm talking about. I would also be willing to bet a reasonable sum of money that this topic did not come up in your L
363.
by btilly 1y ago
It would be more accurate to say that most mathematical CS fits inside of constructivist foundations. Of course it also fits inside of classical foundations. So someone with constructivist inclinations may be drawn to that field. But partic
364.
by btilly 1y ago
You literally cannot doubt the existence of this oracle, without doubting what existence means in classical mathematics. Here is why a classical mathematician would say that this oracle exists. Let f(program, input, n) be 1 or 0 depending
365.
by btilly 1y ago
We each find different things delightful. What I like, you may not. And vice versa. But it is easy to present deep ideas from constructivism, without mentioning the word constructivism. Or even acknowledging that the philosophy exists. For
366.
by btilly 1y ago
There are plenty of politicians with R in the name. That their policies don't look like Republican policies of 30 years ago shouldn't surprise. Republican policies of 30 years ago didn't look much like Republican policies of
367.
by btilly 1y ago
You really think that the public will connect the dots. Trump's "big beautiful bill" makes a lot of those painful cuts. But it also keeps them from taking effect until too late in 2028 to affect the next election. Between now
368.
by btilly 1y ago
Trump's decision to hide the list was the first time that I've seen MAGA anything split with Trump. Proof that it contains egregious crimes by Trump, really could widen that. Doubly so given that these are crimes which Trump can s
369.
by btilly 1y ago
So having a different philosophy from you makes me presumptive? What makes you presume that you have any business telling someone with different beliefs from you, what is OK to believe? You may believe in the existence of whatever you like.
370.
by btilly 1y ago
Well yes. We can certainly make a function that acts something like that oracle in some special cases. But my point was to give an example of something that cannot be constructively created. The oracle that I described cannot exist within t
371.
by btilly 1y ago
You're literally talking about how I should regard the hypothetical answers that might be produced by something that I think doesn't exist. There's a pretty clear case of putting the cart before the horse here. On being presu
372.
by btilly 1y ago
It would be weird for a constructivist to be interested in a possible world that they don't believe exists. Theoretically possible? Sure. But the kinds of questions that lead you there are generally in opposition to the kinds of princi
373.
by btilly 1y ago
I had already read the second. I'm not so enthused about the first.
374.
by btilly 1y ago
That's like asserting the existence of a bank account in my name with a billion dollars in it that I know nothing about. I won't ever be able to find a contradiction from that claim, because I have no way to find that bank account
375.
by btilly 1y ago
I'm definitely not trying to say that the existence of uncountable sets requires the axiom of choice. Cantor's diagonalization argument for the reals demonstrates otherwise. I'm saying that to go from the uncountability of th
376.
by btilly 1y ago
Sure, we can choose to work in a set of axioms that says that there exists an oracle that can solve the Halting problem. But the fact that such systems don't create contradictions emphatically *DOES NOT* demonstrate the constructive ex
377.
by btilly 1y ago
My point is that going from a lay understanding of mathematics to "just accept ZFC" means jumping past a variety of debatable philosophical points, and accepting a standard collection of answers to them. Mathematicians gloss over
378.
by btilly 1y ago
Yes, you can show such equiconsistency statements. As Gödel proved, for any set of classical axioms, there is a corresponding set of intuitionistic axioms. And if the classical axioms are inconsistent, then so is the intuitionistic equivale
379.
by btilly 1y ago
Your guesses at what I seem to think are completely off base and insulting. When I say "modern math courses", I mean like the standard courses that most future mathematicians take on their way to various degrees. For all that we m
380.
by btilly 1y ago
LOL If she laughs at that kind of thing, I can see why you married her.
381.
by btilly 1y ago
Here's a hint. When someone makes a reference to something that was actively debated for decades, and you're not familiar with said debates, you should probably assume that you're missing some piece of relevant knowledge. ht
382.
by btilly 1y ago
When you say "given ZFC", you're assuming a lot. Including a notion of mathematical existence which bears little relation to any concept that most lay people have of what mathematical existence might mean. In particular, you
383.
by btilly 1y ago
I guarantee that a naive presentation doesn't actually include the axioms, and doesn't address the philosophical questions dividing formalism from constructivism. Uncountable need not mean more. It can mean that there are things t
384.
by btilly 1y ago
I'm curious. Did either of you ever notice the implicit philosophical assumptions that you have to make to come to the conclusion that one infinity can be larger than another? Despite the fact that this was actively debated for decades
385.
by btilly 1y ago
Proposed rule: People writing about the history of mathematics, should learn something about the history of mathematics. Mathematicians didn't just randomly decide to go to abstraction and the foundations of mathematics. They were forc
386.
by btilly 1y ago
Only in the sense that there are federal regulations that apply to all industries. But, for an extreme example, there is absolutely no federal regulation of marijuana dispensaries. Whose existence is entirely enabled by state laws, and fede
387.
by btilly 1y ago
I'm still of the belief that whistleblower John Barnett was murdered by Boeing. I have heard absolutely nothing about Boeing that suggests that anything meaningful has changed at all there.
388.
by btilly 1y ago
I see your Chinese and raise you Russian.
389.
by btilly 1y ago
This is selection bias. You are picking companies that, in retrospect, we all know because they did well. But most of the companies that people were "investing" in at the time, the ones that drove that PE, were dot coms that went
390.
by btilly 1y ago
I agree. But I'm also pointing to the fact that this is easier to change in some places than others. It doesn't just take will to change. It takes more will in some places than others. Because you have to fight against the layout

More ›