deltasixeight

15 ms·

61.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
After some research I've come to the conclusion that my statement is in fact definitively wrong. What I said was this: We do not know if classical mechanics is deterministic. I am wrong. The correct statement is: We do know that classi
62.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
No look at my wording more carefully. You are misinterpreting it. I said we don't know if a "closed form solution" is deterministic because we don't even know if there is a "closed form solution." I also said t
63.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>Unfortunately your aggressiveness and rudeness make your comment of lower quality than the one you are answering - read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html to see what site rules you are breaking as well. B
64.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>We know that exactly the same initial conditions will lead to the exact same trajectory. Do we have a proof of this? Or is it that we just assume this?
65.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
I didn't say that. For the three body problem we don't know the closed form solution under Newtonian physics. So if we don't know it, then a closed solution may not even exist. If we don't know whether a closed form solu
66.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>So theoretically speaking, they are deterministic, but practically they are unpredictable. The three body problem is REFERING to the ideal case where only a perfect model is considered. Within this model we don't even know the math
67.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m26jz1YyIk8 The short but very very accurate documentary above (2 min) explains why. Basically, evolution does not reward survival of the "smartest" or survival of the person with &
68.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Relax the amount of overthinking people do is negligible compared to the amount of under thinking. Overthinking is not a problem, seriously. This guy in the article only thinks it's a problem because people are acutely aware of overthi
69.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
I put quotes around them because they aren't actually planned. They're officially and canonically called "planning" codes but no real long term urban planning is involved. It's more short term satisfaction planning
70.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>Lines of code != system's components. Did I say this? No. Does this have anything to do with the conversation? No. >It's why we don't split a 20 line function into twenty 2 line functions (where the first line is one o
71.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>universally because it really depends on where you work (and have worked). There are plenty of places which make time to refactor along the way, in small and large ways. Its good engineering, and a healthy code base nets better long ter
72.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
That's too simple of an answer. These codes did not exist until recent times. The codes actually exist because people wanted them to exist, because car culture influenced the way people think and how they should live. All these codes w
73.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Car dependence comes from the low density infrastructure. The rules are a consequence of that. Low density infrastructure exists because many cities were built during a time when car companies were trying to make the automobile mainstream.
74.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>This is your problem, right here. Nah. There's no problem here. This is the most common behavior in any place corporate or not. Humans resist change. However specifically for corporations, it is very very very rare for a company to
75.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Those aren't "planning" codes, it's more rules and guidelines. Development is still largely free and left to the market so long as they stick within the guidelines.
76.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
A master plan doesn't hurt, they could get it wrong but it's not that much worse than haphazard randomness. The good cities you see aren't good because of early planning. They're good because of constant vigilance to imp
77.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
What's the energy usage per area. per capita? I doubt this can beat tokyo, HK, Tapei or NYC. If you want to build an actual car free place you need high density buildings and a subway system. A place like NYC or Tokyo is the true futur
78.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>Extracting code and moving it somewhere else can truly be a death by a thousand cuts. This is not what I mean by modularity. Let me be more specific. The code CAN be seperated and it can be recombined without a structural code rewrite.
79.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>Except you do. It's harder to understand and less readable; and in a real life rather than made up example, addTwo is in some other module entirely and has side effects that are completely invisible (in most languages) when just lo
80.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> Right. The problem I've seen way too much is modularizing code too early in its lifecycle. This mistake seems to happen a lot by smart programmers who are inexperienced. I don't see this as bad. Modularization protects agains
81.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> This is a common problem with improper application of the idea of modularity as well as OO concepts (in particular, breaking things into classes and thinking it creates a module). Exactly! The class is not the smallest unit of modulari
82.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Read the 2nd paragraph of my post you replied to. You talk about true modularity and it is addressed in my second paragraph. If you find these problems with your code then the code was Never modular in the first place. Modular code involves
83.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
I would say the file thing is unnecessary. That's just an OCD thing. You can break stuff up and keep it within the same file, it literally has the same effect. I understand why you think that type of modularity is bad, but it is actual
84.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
If you can move your code and spread it around it is Modular by definition. This is never a bad thing from a design perspective. It is only a bad thing from a complexity and readability perspective. More likely you think it's a bad thi
85.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
No hacking code to pieces makes it more complex. The trade off here is that the code becomes more modular. Whether you want your code to be more modular is an opinionated decision but most people don't realize the benefits of high modu
86.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
This is a stepping stone for replacing developers all together. Conceptually that is the overall goal.
87.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
War is unlikely. Globalization of all economies means everybody loses in a war. The devastation will harm everyone in a significant way. The most likely outcome is just perpetual political squabbling and the continuous feeling that war is o
88.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Power is an important factor, but to assume it's the only factor is irrational. Think about it like this, China built the biggest high speed rail network in the world and doing such a thing wasn't just about "power" it w
89.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Finance is the more broader term here. China likely also doesn't want their greatest minds working on High Frequency Trading algorithms. The article is about tech, but from a broader perspective letting the free market completely decid
90.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
This is a one sided view and also represents classic bias of the western viewpoint. Sure a "dictator" (more accurately "central power" for China) wants to consolidate power but to think the dictator is a one dimensional

More ›