ck113

4 ms·

1.
One Feature in One Month or Ten in Six?(whilefalse.blogspot.com)
3 points by ck113 15y ago|0 comments
2.
by ck113 16y ago
Seth Roberts has made his entire reputation on self-experimentation. (Partly on the strange things he claims to have learned by doing it, and also partly on his defense of it as a methodology.) He's written some papers that talk about the
3.
by ck113 17y ago
All due respect, I don't think you're getting what Robin Hanson is about. (Which is understandable if this is the only post of his you've ever read.) The point of this post isn't to criticize Alex Grass's choices, it's to point out that ou
4.
by ck113 17y ago
I think it's interesting. Not so much the ultimate question of whether they can find him, but rather the things we learn along the way about exactly how much a reader base with no special (e.g., law enforcement) privileges can dig up abou
5.
by ck113 17y ago
Ok, I know it's violently tangential and pretty silly, but I noticed this in the article too. I thought it was interesting because (I'm guessing) it's not a case of the author not knowing the grammatical rules you've just described, but of
6.
by ck113 17y ago
It's mostly just a technicality of the definition. NP (and P for that matter) can only contain "decision problems," i.e., problems for which the answer must be Yes or No. So the NP formulation of the Traveling Salesman problem is "does thi
7.
by ck113 17y ago
Sure, of course. I'm not out to convince anyone that P != NP here, especially not using Proof By Obviousness. I just meant to underline one of the intuitions that makes so many people believe they must be different. Also, like so many ter
8.
by ck113 17y ago
Ooh! Ooh! I just remembered another cool thing about the "polynomial-time verifier" formulation of NP. It makes it possible to phrase the P vs. NP question much more starkly. The standard formulation of P vs. NP is something like "do det
9.
by ck113 17y ago
From the article: "Another interesting feature of NP problems is that a solution can be checked in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine. So, checking a solution of a NP problem is a P problem." That's not just an interesting f
10.
by ck113 17y ago
I thought this was the most telling line of the article: "Ultimately the first factor of performance is the maturity of the implementation." That supports a common conviction held by fans of functional programming: if all of the years of
11.
by ck113 17y ago
To make it even more abstruse, it's not usually results that we describe as "relativizing", but proofs and proof techniques. For example, the proof technique we call "diagonalization" relativizes. If I prove that complexity class A is cont
12.
by ck113 17y ago
I don't have an opinion about the Scheme -> Python switch, but I didn't find this a very compelling objection. The author seems to assume that a CS degree is meant to teach you to write software. (E.g., "how exactly do you write softwa
13.
by ck113 17y ago
If you're interested in wild speculation (I have no idea how Twitter's database works), here's how I interpreted Biz's explanation: With the new system, say user Foo writes "@Bar lol me too!". Then Twitter can take Foo's follower list, joi