gjm11

46 ms·

421.
by gjm11 2y ago
This seems like a separate thing from what you were talking about before. (Unless you're referring again to the "no positive belief in gods" definition of "atheism", but I don't think you can be since in fact i
422.
by gjm11 2y ago
I think both what you get in real time and what you get when someone has time to consider and check for errors and polish are "real". It's not that each person has a perfectly well-defined set of beliefs and ideas, and (1
423.
by gjm11 2y ago
The argument made there isn't about "things like this". To save everyone a click, here's a summary of that argument: you might want Google Maps to let you ask for the "nicest" rather than the "quickest&quo
424.
by gjm11 2y ago
Unless I'm misunderstanding the post, it's the author's own code. (Here's the relevant change, removing those four lines of code: https://github.com/spc476/lua-conmanorg/commit/0ba8d616d1
425.
by gjm11 2y ago
You're conflating three separate things. 1. Accepting versus rejecting the axiom of choice. 2. Classical versus intuitionistic mathematics. Intuitionism goes much further than just rejecting the Axiom of Choice, and e.g. says that you
426.
by gjm11 2y ago
I think there's an important difference between the situations. With (non-)Euclidean geometry, you have a bunch of axioms and it turns out you don't have to accept the parallel postulate even if you accept all the others. With m
427.
by gjm11 2y ago
"And, oh! Father Christmas, if you love me at all, Bring me a big, red, india-rubber ball!" -- A. A. Milne, _King John's Christmas_
428.
by gjm11 2y ago
This http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/dialog... appears to be an English translation of the fourth and final "day" in the Dialogue. Here's the last thing Simplicio say
429.
by gjm11 2y ago
Duplicate of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40748225 except that that one links to the version of this article at the Washington Post , which MSN is merely syndicating. As I said in comments on that one: This article
430.
by gjm11 2y ago
I see that this got at least one downvote, which I guess indicates that someone thinks it's an unfair (or at least insufficiently-justified) complaint, so let me try to justify it a bit. So, to me, "AI is exhausting the power grid
431.
by gjm11 2y ago
Ah, OK. My hazy memory was that it was the goatse.cx image, which is for most people more unpalatable than a testicle in an eggcup, but I didn't check exactly what it was :-).
432.
by gjm11 2y ago
This article claiming "AI is exhausting the power grid" seems awfully light on actual evidence that AI is exhausting the power grid.
433.
by gjm11 2y ago
That might be because Jamie Zawinski's website, which that link links to, does something ... special ... when it sees HN in the "Referer" field, so anyone actually following that link from here would (unless they take special
434.
by gjm11 2y ago
I don't think I understand your first sentence. Big tech wasn't invested in crypto in the way it is in AI. For a few days Meta pretended they were going to launch a cryptocurrency, but that's kinda it. Whereas in this case al
435.
by gjm11 2y ago
You say that like it's a joke, but they're called mammals because they have mammae -- breasts, udders -- and although I don't know completely for certain I'd be flabbergasted if Latin mamma weren't very directly r
436.
by gjm11 2y ago
In the alternate view, the k^2 isn't there any more. Not because we are computing a different number, but because we're organizing the computation differently. (It's turned into a d^2 factor, except that we then need to treat
437.
by gjm11 2y ago
Yes. (HN comments aren't the best medium for writing mathematics. I hope this ends up reasonably readable.) (d choose k) is the number of ways to pick k things from d. (d choose k) k^2 is the number of ways to pick k things from d, and
438.
by gjm11 2y ago
Someone else has done something similar for that work: https://www.sunclipse.org/?p=3194 -- you might find either that what he's done is good enough to satisfy you, or that you can build on what he did.
439.
by gjm11 2y ago
Well, yes, self-deprecating humour is a thing, but there's a difference between Tom Lehrer pretending he can't really sing and someone else claiming he can't really sing.
440.
by gjm11 2y ago
That seems unfair. He is (or at least was when he was doing it -- he's 96 years old now) a very competent singer and pianist. He's not particularly trying to make a beautiful sound, but there's more to singing than that .
441.
by gjm11 2y ago
Those words haven't (so far as I know) been sung either: they're from one of his spoken preambles, not from any of the songs. (The preambles are generally at least as funny as the songs, at least in my estimation.)
442.
by gjm11 2y ago
The point of a proof is very much not just that it enables you to know that the thing is true, but also to give insight into why it's true. (And hence, e.g., what other related things are likely to be true and how one might prove t
443.
by gjm11 2y ago
There's maybe a two-to-three-order-of-magnitude difference between the difficulty of monads and the difficulty of this stuff.
444.
by gjm11 2y ago
I wonder whether this was inspired by https://xkcd.com/26/ . (I'm guessing not since there's no mention of it. But it's a nice coincidence.)
445.
by gjm11 2y ago
Ah, my apologies. I thought I remembered the Cliffle post saying that, but in fact he says it specifically about the kernel behaviour rather than about the generalization to REPLY_FAULT. I hope no one was misled.
446.
by gjm11 2y ago
More the first than the second. There are things other than the integers for which it makes sense to talk about "the primes". One example is: polynomials (with coefficients in, let's say, the complex numbers). In this case it
447.
by gjm11 2y ago
See also: this recent HN story https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40178652 from Cliff Biffle's blog https://cliffle.com/blog/hubris-reply-fault/ about the Hubris OS used by 0xide ( https:&#
448.
by gjm11 2y ago
It doesn't feel to me like much of C++'s complexity is just "the complexity of reality" being faithfully exposed. I'd wonder whether that's just me being dim, but if so then I think Bjarne Stroustrup and Herb
449.
by gjm11 2y ago
Maybe the figures are for large-scale power-grid solar, or something? (I share your suspicion, though. And the figures being used for nuclear seem too high to me; e.g., no one is building nuclear power facilities as dangerous as Chernobyl a
450.
by gjm11 2y ago
The thing linked to doesn't show it not to be true. It gives point estimates of 0.03 deaths per TWh for nuclear and 0.02 deaths per TWh for solar (and higher figures for everything else) and says "the uncertainties around these va

More ›