eigenket

37 ms·

421.
by eigenket 3y ago
> Now, let's define a new function g: K → R^n such that g(x) = (f(x), f(x), ..., f(x)) for all x in K. In other words, each component of g is equal to f(x) for all x in K. That's hilarious
422.
by eigenket 3y ago
I have previously lived in the USA, I'm not sure why you assumed I have no experience of that. In general I would expect someone who speaks the language of the country I live in now at roughly the same level I speak English to have a p
423.
by eigenket 3y ago
The EU also has a right to privacy enshrined via the Treaty of Lisbon, so even if this law had got through the parliament somehow it should/would have been stuck down by the courts.
424.
by eigenket 3y ago
Well one of these guys is Bob Menendez, who is currently indicted on his second federal corruption charges and who happily accepts cash and gold bars from Egyptian nationals.
425.
by eigenket 3y ago
Even more than that, its article 7 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights so its baked into the foundation of the EU itself via the Treaty of Lisbon (which is why its unsurprising this law failed to pass the EU parliament). Even if s
426.
by eigenket 3y ago
The EU parliament did its job pretty much 100% correctly in my opinion. Their job is to consider the laws the EU commission suggests and thats what they did. They correctly determined it was a shitty law and voted it down. In my opinion you
427.
by eigenket 3y ago
The short answer is that we're talking about the EU. Thats a US thing. As far as I can tell looking from the outside the US system is set up so that if you aren't ridiculously wealthy yourself you pretty much need lobbyist money t
428.
by eigenket 3y ago
I count 24 experts from 5 eyes countries and 8 from non 5 eyes countries. Not sure if thats relevant but it is funny.
429.
by eigenket 3y ago
Despite the lobbying from American organisations (Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon, Palantir and others who worked with Thorn on this [1][2]) the EU Parliament did the right thing this time. [1] https://www.thorn.org/part
430.
by eigenket 3y ago
I agree that some published proofs are not as clear as they're supposed to be, but I disagree that formalizing things in computer-based proof checkers is the way forward there. Computer proof checking is cool, but its an augment to wha
431.
by eigenket 3y ago
I quite strongly disagree with this. Mathematicians aren't rigourous just for the hell of it. We have examples where a lack of rigour caused a bunch of people to waste a bunch of time working of stuff that ultimately didn't work a
432.
by eigenket 3y ago
The original incompleteness theorems apply to any logical system which can formulate and prove a certain chunk of arithmetic, yes. It turns out that the amount of arithmetic you actually need is incredibly small, so these results apply to m
433.
by eigenket 3y ago
Oh, by the way, it matters here that "weak" in the source you quote had a very specific technical meaning. If axioms are weak it means they apply to many things. Stronger axioms make more restrictions and apply to more specific th
434.
by eigenket 3y ago
I don't understand your questions. They are relevant for geometry, they aren't really relevant to anything else but they're axioms for geometry so being relevant for geometry is what you'd expect.
435.
by eigenket 3y ago
Tarski's axioms for geometry are the standard example of a system which is both complete and consistent. It is even decidable - there is an algorithm which you can feed a statement and it outputs whether it is true or not.
436.
by eigenket 3y ago
Them doing nothing (i.e. having no effect on spacetime at all when in superposition) would be a very wild thing to happen. I can't overstate how incredibly unexpected that would be. We believe (pretty strongly) that objects with mass d
437.
by eigenket 3y ago
I am very confident that quantum gravity "exists" in some sense. Here is the argument: In quantum physics labs all over the world we can put stuff in superpositions of being in different places. These objects are currently pretty
438.
by eigenket 3y ago
They didn't blindly accept it. They originally rejected it, and eventually published it in a special issue called "science wars", the purpose of which was to have as many different points of view as possible. This special iss
439.
by eigenket 3y ago
Its not really a conspiracy theory. I think Maine would have ignored its obligations regardless of whether they were written in the documents or not so I don't think there is any influence or duping there. Essentially my view is that t
440.
by eigenket 3y ago
Given that about a month or so after the redaction they renaged on their obligations over Grass Island that seems unlikely https://www.mainememory.net/sitebuilder/site/3283/page/5208/...
441.
by eigenket 3y ago
It is interesting that the redaction happened one month before the final judgement in the Granger v. Avery court case. https://www.mainememory.net/sitebuilder/site/3283/page/5208/...
442.
by eigenket 3y ago
> Part of the redacted material pertained to Maine’s treaty obligations to Wabanaki people. The motivation is very obvious - they wanted to conveniently forget their treaty obligations.
443.
by eigenket 3y ago
While the sum of many i.i.d. random variables may be easy to model, that doesn't mean that everything involving i.i.d. random variables is easy to model.
444.
by eigenket 3y ago
> Either things are causal, in which case, you can replay everything and arrive at the same point. That doens't fit an intuitive definition of free will. I think this is somewhat inaccurate. I'm not sure if I personally agree w
445.
by eigenket 3y ago
> Free will is equivalent to randomness with many (asymptotically infinite) degrees of freedom. I don't think this is obviously true. I can make a random number generating device with as many degrees of freedom as you like by produc
446.
by eigenket 3y ago
> But if you're trying to apply the math, if you're studying linear algebra because it's useful rather than for its own sake, then you don't need proofs. To follow the same analogy, it's like learning enough Engl
447.
by eigenket 3y ago
This is not snobbery, some subjects just have prerequisites. You can't learn computer science without having a good sense of what an "algorithm" is, you have to know how to read and write and understand algorithms. Similarly
448.
by eigenket 3y ago
There are (at least) two different things we're calling "linear algebra here", roughly speaking one is building the tools and one is using the tools. The mathematicians need to understand the basics of of mathematical proofs
449.
by eigenket 3y ago
AKS is an example of a deterministic algorithm which works out whether a number is prime or composite and runs in polynomial time in the number of bits in the number. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKS_primality_test I&
450.
by eigenket 3y ago
This is a beautifully and slightly ridiculously formal comment to read two comments deep in response to my comment beginning "In an informal sense".

More ›