kalenx

6 ms·

31.
by kalenx 4y ago
For most usages, you don't need to write the code. Sometimes buff out rough edges for your specific application, but in my 12 years in academia, I think I've only really _written_ Latex twice.
32.
by kalenx 5y ago
Now, this is a true phase-of-the-moon bug: http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/jargon300/phaseofthemoo...
33.
by kalenx 5y ago
I think scale is the key here. You can do that within a family, you might do that within a village, perhaps in some perfect circumstances you will be able to do that within a group of a few 1000's people, but never at the scale of our
34.
by kalenx 6y ago
Setting up a cycle lane in place is cheap, but not easy (at least in North America, people will always complain about the "war on cars"). Also, setting up a good cycle lane can be more expensive than you think. If you have a nice
35.
by kalenx 6y ago
I'm probably missing something, but 12,000$ * 328 millions = 3.9 T$, not 39?
36.
by kalenx 6y ago
I don't see how you came to your conclusion. Gov would tax you as they do now (including when you receive shares for instance), by asking you money. It is up to you to find it. If your assets are illiquid, then it is your problem not t
37.
by kalenx 6y ago
Losing the argument sucks right? Guess you'll have to get use to it. I know I'm right while you do not know, so you're wrong. It's hard to argue against pure logic like mine... Maybe one day you'll understand.
38.
by kalenx 6y ago
See? I knew you'd be saying that. Ipso facto, I won. All the best.
39.
by kalenx 6y ago
I did this myself. I took a very long ladder and went in space with the Voyager probes, then threw them very hard out of the solar system. That was quite fun actually.
40.
by kalenx 6y ago
See? I knew you'd be saying that. I won. All the best.
41.
by kalenx 6y ago
Sure, prepend all your sentences by "The evidence that I have seen indicates" if it makes you happy. It changes nothing about the fact that knowledge exists even if you can personally experience it using solely your senses. I know
42.
by kalenx 6y ago
We sent Voyager probes through the solar system using Newton laws, although we know that general relativity is more accurate. Knowledge is a spectrum. If you think that anything has a definitive answer, then I don't know what you are d
43.
by kalenx 6y ago
Sure, here's the first youtube result I got: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQaYLbsl33g > I can only say that I will watch in good faith. You won't. > If, as you seem to suggest, I do see issues with the vi
44.
by kalenx 6y ago
> I'm saying, everyone - EVERYONE - is accepting claims all day long, without any proof. You included. But saying "no one is checking" is false. For every claim, there are people who do, actually, check. But you ask for _e
45.
by kalenx 6y ago
> When you test, and in one case you find something different to what is presented, what do you do? First, you check for external factors which may have affect the test. If you can confirm you cannot reproduce past results, you may consi
46.
by kalenx 6y ago
It is extremely simple to do that. But you won't accept it. You would say the gas canister containing oxygen to be "unproved", or the ignition source to be "unproved to be so", or the camera to be "unproved to
47.
by kalenx 6y ago
> Surely testing what you know against a contrary opinion can only be a positive experience. Trivial counterexample: if I repeat "you are an [insert your favorite insult here], what you say is false" again and again, which can
48.
by kalenx 6y ago
It isn't much to ask at all, but what you describe makes little sense. 1) What's the issue with "showman pop and some water droplets"? What's the difference between producing 1 mL or 1 gallon of water in terms of _v
49.
by kalenx 6y ago
Be careful in bringing up "open mindedness". If the most compelling thing you can say about your position is that "it is so weird and obtuse that only true open minds will not reject it", I'm not sure you're ma
50.
by kalenx 6y ago
That's the kind of argument that could make sense in a vacuum, but does not apply at all in practice. Sure, _in theory_, I would be glad to know enough, to have enough time and to have enough money to verify every scientific theory sin
51.
by kalenx 6y ago
I verified a _lot_ at school. Simple stuff, sure, but it's the method which matters, not the thing you verify. I guess it may depend on the education systems, but seeing it as an 'indoctrination system' is just dishonest, giv
52.
by kalenx 6y ago
It's not disappointing to see humans caring for others. There's a difference between "panicking over the disease" and wanting our elder people (for which the IFR is way over 0.35%) to be safe. Notwithstanding the fact th
53.
by kalenx 6y ago
Agree with your second point, but for the first criticism, many fields actually use z as the "depth" axis.
54.
by kalenx 6y ago
Sorry, but a team of 50 persons in total to support a project as complex as Firefox is not reasonable speculation at all.
55.
by kalenx 6y ago
I don't even understand the point you are making then (apart from me apparently arguing solely with sophisms, which is kind of a prowess). How this "rigor" you are calling for should manifest, then? Put bluntly, my point was
56.
by kalenx 6y ago
I was reacting to the part of your post I quoted. The thing is that it has little to do about rigor -- or if I may sin again, it is equivalent to say that software developers lack rigor: sure, some of them do (as some scientists do), but ev
57.
by kalenx 6y ago
> How many more stories do we have to read about some research getting published in a journal only to have to retract it down the road because they had a bug in the software before we start asking if maybe there needs to be more rigor in
58.
by kalenx 6y ago
If I had to guess given the journal where it was published, I'd say it is for formatting purposes (better distribution of the words in the line). Edit: reading the other comments, beginning vs non-beginning of a sentence also make sens
59.
by kalenx 6y ago
Well, if an airplane/boat pilot formation is required to get the "right" definition of the word autopilot, there is a problem, IMHO.
60.
by kalenx 6y ago
The "why" is not really relevant here, the general perception is. The fact is, if you say "autopilot" and "self driving capabilities" to most people, they will infer that the car does not need a driver to be op

More ›