eriksank

15 ms·

91.
by eriksank 14y ago
Well, the main actors are still laughing about this and asking us: "You do not like this and so what?", and they are right, because indeed: "So what?". They damn well know that nobody is going to do anything about it anyway. We all know tha
92.
by eriksank 14y ago
I have created a blog post explaining why I think the language has too many problems to ever take off: http://erik-poupaert.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-felix-programm...
93.
by eriksank 14y ago
I find it definitely a nice language proposal, but there are a few issues, I guess. A first one is that many of the distinctions introduced (such as proc,fun,gen) are all optimization issues. I would appreciate if it were possible to do th
94.
by eriksank 14y ago
Even though I am not particularly interested in interfering with how the politicians and their servants are taking the general populace for a ride -- since they may have indeed asked for it -- the politicians and their servants should know
95.
by eriksank 14y ago
Who else but the politicians and their servants? We can let them erode our position further and further and further, or we could also finally start putting a stop to that. As all of us know, respect is ultimately based on the fear for repri
96.
by eriksank 14y ago
Look. It is our own fault, since we are not doing anything about it. They will never, ever respect us, unless they seriously fear us.
97.
by eriksank 14y ago
Well, it may not even matter. As you can see they are very heavy-handed. That means they do not fear any reprisals for this. That is obviously where the problem is. Ultimately, respect is always based on the fear for reprisals.
98.
by eriksank 14y ago
When balancing my dislike for furthering the practice of gambling with my dislike for the increasingly excessive use of force by the politicians and their servants, I think I should still side with the software developer. Since the politici
99.
This is what is wrong with the marketing and management fields of study(erik-poupaert.blogspot.com)
1 points by eriksank 14y ago|0 comments
100.
by eriksank 14y ago
Asking anybody to be a triple-A engineer -- without which there is simply nothing to sell -- and in addition to that NOT to do things in terms of sales and finance that could seriously damage the thing, means that there are indeed only that
101.
by eriksank 14y ago
The documentation standards seem to be insisting on that kind of things. The "why" can only be clarified in the location where it is used; which I did: Changing an array value, changes the original object, while the creation of countering n
102.
Documenting source code(erik-poupaert.blogspot.com)
1 points by eriksank 14y ago|3 comments
103.
Computing the equilibrium points for the Boston College 3-player games(erik-poupaert.blogspot.com)
1 points by eriksank 14y ago|0 comments
104.
Are 3-or-more-player Nash games really that hard to compute?(github.com)
1 points by eriksank 14y ago|0 comments
105.
by eriksank 14y ago
PHP may have its flaws, but Python does not seem to be the answer either. By the way, have they already found a fail-safe way to visually represent the difference between a space and a tab? Since space is a keyword and a tab too, how does t
106.
by eriksank 14y ago
> it simply means that the reality does not behave in a way that corresponds to the math. In that case, we should watch out to use that kind of math in engineering or for example calculate expected airplane behaviour with it.
107.
by eriksank 14y ago
The copyright owners have a bigger problem than what they may consider unauthorized copying. Drawing attention to compositions in sound and vision has become so much more difficult because it has become so much easier to distribute them. Th
108.
by eriksank 14y ago
Probably worse than that. I simply refuse to make any such key difference between math and science. In my opinion, both math and science are empirical.
109.
by eriksank 14y ago
Math and science use exactly the same method of reducing their claims to their basic claims and backing those with a failed search for counterexamples. Consequently, all untruth is invariably always the result of the untruth hidden in the b
110.
by eriksank 14y ago
I think it may be possible to phrase a claim for this. for any almostZero, it is possible to find an integer m1, so that the m1.2.pi + pi/2 is greater than 1/almostZero and therefore for which sin(m1.2.pi+pi/2) =1; 1/(m1.2.pi + pi/2) will b
111.
by eriksank 14y ago
The claim follows trivially from Gödel's Incompleteness. Claiming the truth of a theory amounts to extending it with a statement about its consistency, automatically making the whole inconsistent.
112.
by eriksank 14y ago
Well, I have to insist that math does not prove a statement true. Math only proves that the statement does not contain original untruth. > Not being able to provide a counter example does not prove the claim. It is never possible to pro
113.
by eriksank 14y ago
Well, if there is such d-e, the person challenging the reduction should be able to supply it. Since it just a number, he should be able to supply that number to the program and trigger a failure.
114.
by eriksank 14y ago
The whole point was that we were going to write a program and invite each other to find counterexamples for the statement proposed, so that we can finally stop the bullshit of ad-hominem arguments. I know it must be hard for you to switch b
115.
by eriksank 14y ago
> That sentence is essentially a rewording of an old-fashioned delta-epsilon proof. So, how does that indicate a flaw in contemporary mathematics at all? The first flaw is that it is not a proof but only a reduction. The second flaw is
116.
by eriksank 14y ago
> This, if the program did fail all that's been proven is that that particular delta-epsilon function, the defeatEpsilon here, doesn't work. It would prove that such epsilon exists. That counterexample should be enough to reject the cla
117.
by eriksank 14y ago
I suspect that such program could revolve around showing that for any arbitrarily small number -- almostZero -- you can always find two smaller numbers x1,x2 as such that sin(1/x1) is smaller and sin(1/x2) is larger than sin(1/almostZero).
118.
by eriksank 14y ago
In my opinion, Kurt Gödel's claim points to something that seems to go wrong in Alonzo Church's successor function. For the sake of the argument, let's call that a bug. It would take a serious amount of work to point out how that would affe
119.
by eriksank 14y ago
I like your attempt. At least, it is meaningful. Only the domain of statements about facts can be verified with facts. The domain of statements about statements cannot. You have indeed correctly underlined that the rules governing scientifi
120.
by eriksank 14y ago
The original CH mapping, that is, "a proof is a program, the formula it proves is a type for the program" is quite hard to achieve because it tries to demonstrate that a particular statement is true. It is much easier to honestly fail in de

More ›