jcahill

18 ms·

91.
by jcahill 9y ago
I challenge "one of the MOST influential people" as vigorously as is posthumanly possible. Off the top, how many people here who are both under 30 and hack on something (hardware, wetware, anything ) know who scoble is? I only va
92.
by jcahill 9y ago
"Progressive" and "Conservative" are sometimes used in extra-political contexts this way, e.g. in linguistics when characterizing dialects.
93.
by jcahill 9y ago
Fortunately, Trello's free plan limits are so low that very little of substance will be lost.
94.
by jcahill 9y ago
Nothing valiant about telling users not to use a standard feature. Double-plus anti-valiant to suggest prioritizing mobile over desktop.
95.
by jcahill 9y ago
Hack isn't all that great. Here are tons of alternatives: https://github.com/chrissimpkins/codeface (Use Input)
96.
by jcahill 9y ago
That wouldn't work like you're hoping. You're assuming a (representative) respondent pool that's all of these: 1. capable of switching off preference falsification for a survey 2. introspectively active (and accurately s
97.
by jcahill 9y ago
(but really, the term "cognitive" used in this context boils down to g-loading, so "non-kernel processing" is as apt as anything else — an improvement over "non-cognitive" at the very least.)
98.
by jcahill 9y ago
Usually refers to precognition in the psychic sense, in english.
99.
by jcahill 9y ago
GNU/cognitive skills
100.
by jcahill 9y ago
Trouble there is simple: academically, he hasn't really innovated anything substantial enough to bother discussing in isolation. I mean that in a purely descriptive sense. Just take a look at his google scholar⁽¹⁾ or crossref search⁽²⁾
101.
by jcahill 9y ago
the poetics of successful sophistry is a potential research topic in its own right, so sure
102.
by jcahill 9y ago
Thing is that he picks an organizing principle⁽¹⁾ and rides it into the ground, through the center of the earth, and back out the other side until eventually de-emphasizing it in favor of some new organizing principle more attractive to cur
103.
by jcahill 9y ago
if you start from a position of disdain instead, you'll be able to move past thinking his works have enough value to suffer the bullshit antics and be well on your way to never thinking about him again except in passing social context.
104.
by jcahill 9y ago
https://archive.is/1CJpA
105.
by jcahill 9y ago
Knuth is not going to "become the rise of scientific publishing" on the basis of your HN comment.
106.
by jcahill 9y ago
> Let that sink in. This is the sort of rhetorical affectation that will have you ridiculed straight out of any room I'm in. Please discontinue.
107.
by jcahill 9y ago
There's always reducing the circle you consider "loved" ones, and CRISPR…
108.
by jcahill 9y ago
For anyone else stuck in a captcha redirect loop: https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2015.7118968
109.
by jcahill 9y ago
Different audiences. Most friends & acquaintances asking me for explanations about august 1 ⒈ get repeatedly caught up on basic blockchain concepts (i.e. go in circles w/ terminology) ⒉ know absolutely nothing about the politics of
110.
by jcahill 9y ago
try this infographic: https://i.imgur.com/RjTkcdQ.png
111.
by jcahill 9y ago
> It also required that I figure out how to “daemonize” the script[.] I found this aspect surprisingly difficult; it seems like a really basic need, but the documentation for how to do this was not especially easy to find. I host my bots
112.
by jcahill 9y ago
rhabdomyolysis. https://archive.fo/KqM4u
113.
by jcahill 9y ago
Notable exception: Meanwhile… (2001). Web blurb, slightly different from print⁽¹⁾ ____________________ Meanwhile began as a series of seven increasingly complex flowcharts. Once the outline of the story was structured, a computer algorithm
114.
by jcahill 10y ago
Commits aren't automated and their contributions aren't commensurate. It's a distributed system, but not one solving the same problem. We can always torture the concrete into extended metaphor. It just doesn't add any va
115.
by jcahill 10y ago
Not mentioned yet: separation of concerns. http://enwp.org/separation_of_presentation_and_content
116.
by jcahill 10y ago
> find me a published scientific paper with only Bayesian results in it Trivial¹, surely? > [B]ut I don't think anyone does it. It would be seen as a stunt. What did you mean by "scientific"? You'd have to hunt for
117.
by jcahill 10y ago
All models are wrong. That much is entailed by 'models'. There is no Zuul.