Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
dfischer
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
14 ms
·
121.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Anything that doesn’t require depending on another. If you use anything that requires another person to complete it or entity then that thing is at risk.
122.
▲
Hypercompositional Algebra, Computer Science and Geometry [pdf]
(res.mdpi.com)
3 points
by
dfischer
6y ago
|
0 comments
123.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
If you like RPN check out Factor and Forth. It’s amazing! 1. https://factorcode.org/ 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forth_(programming_language)
124.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Just because you can recognize something as a unit doesn’t mean that it isn’t continuous fundamentally. If you look at your hand you may count your fingers but they’re still part of your body as a whole. Any “border” is an arbitrary limit t
125.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
That misses the point entirely that most people that actually use bitcoin don’t even use bitcoin core’s wallet. They use other wallets and trust that software and the hardware they are on to be doing the right thing. The average person not
126.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
It’s not resilient to outside forces. I would argue strongly that it’s a huge risk to the majority of the population under the consideration of computation complexity. The computation stack end to end has alarming risks. If the average user
127.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
In a way, anything discrete is a logical assertion that exists purely in imagination. Base reality is continuous in every way. It’s imaginary human reality to separate things apart from the whole. Physics and philosophy have struggled with
128.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Thanks I will check it out.
129.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Excellent response. It’s similar in my perspective to a nuance that exists pervasively today within scientific models. Just because the model allows a prediction doesn’t mean that the model reflects “base reality.” Our models, our tools, ar
130.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Well I appreciate the audience for whatever its worth. The exchange added value. Thanks!
131.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Meant to link here: https://www.isi.edu/newarch/iDOCS/final.finalreport.pdf However there's good links for context on that page. https://www.isi.edu/newarch/ for more.
132.
▲
NewArch Project: Future-Generation Internet Architecture (2000)
(isi.edu)
1 points
by
dfischer
6y ago
|
1 comments
133.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Rules don't exist without consciousness assigning a value . Which is to say that consciousness arbitrarily defines truth from nothing. Rules are not what they are because a rule doesn't have any intrinsic property outside of im
134.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
If it keeps hurting, it should keep being mentioned. When things that hurt are turned into silence, then things don't change that can stop hurt. I understand your point though, and I'm sorry if it came off as an attack. It's
135.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
My critique of is shaded by an irritation of within the both the "non-scientific" community that has been indoctrinated to take what "scientists" say as expert factual irrefutable statements and the "scientific"
136.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
They’re doing it within their frame of definitions which is largely evidence of constrained models leaving options unknown outside the realm of reason thereby excluding outliers of surprising potential.
137.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Almost opposite. If a government institution doesn’t have accounting on money then it’s easier to hide corruption.
138.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
All government ran enterprises still rely on profit, it’s just pushing the profit incentives towards another group.
139.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Yeah it does. In fact I’d argue the entire role of US gov within markets financially ends up on tax evading islands.
140.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Absolutely disagree. Boeing is a direct result of mismanagement and protection because of government involvement. What people use and want is the most effective signal. If regulation by government worked why hasn’t FAA succeeded? Largely ma
141.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
What isn’t a medium? A vacuum? Physical waves depend on a fluid? EM seems to be affected by a medium/fluid. Wonder where the distinctions are more poignant. Maybe degree of affects?
142.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
That’s kind of the kicker. Many are communicating all day every day with the assumption of equivalence to mappings of words to abstractions and largely get by but it is inconsistent. More or less consistent enough is certainty. Nuances exis
143.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Consciousness makes anything true. Consciousness is the only thing that assigns truth. No thing is true without consciousness.
144.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
I look at it like skinning. The universe exists as a geometry. That geometry has properties with different interactions. The geometry exists regardless, but we can give that geometry a name arbitrarily. It’s also the difference between musi
145.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
What’s math?
146.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
I don’t think that you’d be able to communicate the observation of units in a way that’s consistent as a written form of symbology in the rule space of mathematics and the language space used to communicate the mathematics and observation o
147.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Self consistent rules doesn’t imply communication. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room Said another way, if you have a dictionary translating, it doesn’t mean the definition is equivalent. In fact, most defini
148.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Also to add, just because the rules are followed doesn’t mean the proof was communicated. Any layer of translation can act in between two entities without understanding. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room Wei
149.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
Anything we prove requires an axiom which is consent which is imaginary willful agreement. That just means proof is no different to an arbitrary set of rules defined acting like a compiler/interpreter for a programming language. So jus
150.
▲
by
dfischer
6y ago
It’s one of something. When one of something and one of another thing are observed it’s expressed as 1 and 1 so two rivers become one they represent a quantity of observation. Then as 1 and 1 totaling two rivers they come together then exis
More ›