dborg

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by dborg 12y ago

   "Monoids", you keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means. You've basically said "use monoids" without a word of elaboration how to interpret ethics, or really anything, in this formal
2. 2.▲
   by dborg 12y ago

   Yes of course we can get away from defining any new systems of logic by simply taking working with different kinds of relations or functions in our classical logic. This doesn't show that non-classical logics are useless but that class
3. 3.▲
   by dborg 12y ago

   The goal of the post seems to be a curriculum for Computer Science, the chapters 13 and 14 in the list seem to cover most of this. Though I would approach the matter quite differently depending on if I wanted to learn all the CS in a certai
4. 4.▲
   by dborg 13y ago

   Sorry to give a minor correction to a little quibble, but it is the ordinals, not the cardinals, that are a special case of Conway numbers. The cardinals are equivalence classes of these of the form [א_a,א_(a+1)) (Also you can get infinites
5. 5.▲
   by dborg 13y ago

   I was making a joke about the name...
6. 6.▲
   by dborg 13y ago

   At this rate they'll all be solved by mid-century. Weren't these supposed to last us like a millenium or something?
7. 7.▲
   by dborg 13y ago

   Actually you'd want to save it as (1 . (2 . (4 . (8 . NIL)))) since o/w you'd still get quadratic time complexity as you need to unpack your whole list when you add the next value.