dsacco

67 ms·

541.
by dsacco 9y ago
I would say there is absolutely a use for imagery - I wouldn’t advise learning real or complex analysis of without visual aids :). I just think they are easily abused and used to mask gaps in formal knowledge.
542.
by dsacco 9y ago
I agree with what you and the parent are saying here, and I suppose I didn’t well enough communicate my meaning. To clarify, I am focusing on the naive representations, which I find people rely on too much. It is easy to learn lower dimensi
543.
by dsacco 9y ago
Yeah, good point. I like 3Blue1Brown’s videos but in fairness I would say that video is quite a bit closer to the formal side of things than the visual side. I was talking about naive representations - if you build up to the compound visual
544.
by dsacco 9y ago
Not really, no. It’s a neighborhood. A ball is one description of a neighborhood in a specific context. I hesitate to link to Wikipedia, but: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighbourhood_(mathematics) It would not be
545.
by dsacco 9y ago
I think a lot of the problem in mathematics education is motivation. Students (and people learning math in general) encounter two problems: 1. They don’t realize what you’re saying, i.e. number systems and mathematics in general are built f
546.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Rob talks about how complex numbers are just another kind of "fake number" on top of negative numbers, fractions, square roots...And this is a good thing to point out. I agree. I think complex numbers are best explained in
547.
by dsacco 9y ago
You want to be careful with that. Pictures can be helpful in mathematical education (especially in something like a first course in real analysis), but if you get accustomed to relying on learning with pictures your mathematical intuition c
548.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Some sorts of fraud are legal if that's what you mean. No, that's not at all what I mean. What I mean is what I said - inflation isn't just not fraud, the two terms are not even definitionally relevant to one another
549.
by dsacco 9y ago
> For some people that amounts to fraud. But it very clearly isn’t. That’s an egregious abuse of the word, “fraud” by any commonly accepted definition.
550.
by dsacco 9y ago
All we need now is a whitepaper and it’s ready to go.
551.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Maybe I'm wrong and/or you are genuinely open to learning here, but experience suggests people who write comments like yours can only be helped if they force themselves to interact with less privileged folks for an extended
552.
by dsacco 9y ago
I don’t think this needs to be as complex as you’re making it. I take the position that peoples’ careers are not normally derailed by baseless accusation. Or more specifically: they can be, but the likelihood is small enough that it is not
553.
by dsacco 9y ago
> It would be nice if we could build a gossip network which was immune to malicious gossip, but I don't know how one would go about doing that. Come now Colin, the answer is clear. We merely use a blockchain featuring anonymous si
554.
by dsacco 9y ago
> I would worry that the versions of libraries in the container are just the generic packages that ship with the OS, compiled with -march=i686 or whatever the modern equivalent is, where they don't try to take advantage of e.g. AVX
555.
by dsacco 9y ago
> There are not grey areas about "usefulness". I don't care if you're Albert fucking Einstein, I'm not going to let you scare off the other high performers or even cleaning crew that make my business productive
556.
by dsacco 9y ago
Do you mind explaining why it’s a strawman? Maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m not. But we can’t really find out if you tell me I am without explaining why. That’s not a discussion in good faith. From my perspective, war seems to be a pretty good e
557.
by dsacco 9y ago
I think you’re making a good argument, but I have a problem with your broadened use of the word “advocate.” If Bob only made the decision to punch Alice because Mallory asked him to, yes Mallory shares in the responsibility. But that implie
558.
by dsacco 9y ago
Fair enough; let’s go with an easy example. Someone wants to kill you, and is actively trying to kill you. Naturally, you don’t want to die, and are actively trying to survive. You two are in rather extreme opposition; are you willing to to
559.
by dsacco 9y ago
Not at all. I’m not asking for a numerical analysis or rating; I’m asking for a qualitative assessment of what sort of scenario turns their personal knobs in such a way that they are willing to put up with an inconvenient situation. A qua
560.
by dsacco 9y ago
I think you’re being uncharitable in the reason why myself and others are disagreeing that advocation of violence is necessarily violence. This is a problem of definitions, but not the way you’ve said: in the common case, using the word “vi
561.
by dsacco 9y ago
Yes, they are intolerant of those people, regardless of how useful they can otherwise be to society. I think we both understand what the parent was saying, and it seems pretty reasonable to me.
562.
by dsacco 9y ago
I’m sorry, but it’s not clear to me what you’re saying here. Let me restate my point more succinctly: people are generally intolerant of others once those others are sufficiently different from themselves. But they are not typically intoler
563.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Advocating genocide is violence, I think most people would agree. I disagree. I do not consider peaceful advocation of an extremely controversial or violent activity to be violence in of itself. Moreover, I think it is important to b
564.
by dsacco 9y ago
So you established a “Socratic baseline”, so to speak. You’ve made it clear that for views that are extremely different from yours, you’re unwilling to tolerate even a brilliant individual for any amount of productivity. Now can you tell me
565.
by dsacco 9y ago
> As with the original benchmark, I set up a Docker container containing the deep learning frameworks (based on cuDNN 6, the latest version of cuDNN natively supported by the frameworks) that can be used to train each model independentl
566.
by dsacco 9y ago
That's tautological. Implicit in the question is a request for an explanation of why both are not to blame. If you don't believe Bitcoin has an enabling or encouraging effect on activity that is bad for the environment, why is
567.
by dsacco 9y ago
Why not blame both?
568.
by dsacco 9y ago
> We don't know what the strategies are so we are not in a position to evaluate the alpha. Then neither are you, and this entire discussion becomes rather meaningless, wouldn't you say? What we do have are public numbers that
569.
by dsacco 9y ago
> We don't know what the strategies are so we aren't in a position to evaluate their alpha. If that's the stance you want to take, it works both ways. You are no more qualified an outsider than anyone else to evaluate th
570.
by dsacco 9y ago
> If Rentech has a strategy which generates decent returns only with massive and illegal levels of leverage, it does not have a viable strategy, period. And in my previous comment to you, literally the one you replied to, I explained t

More ›