lutusp

69 ms·

691.
by lutusp 11y ago
> I think that saying that m "equals infinity" is probably a bit of a simplification. Yes, it is, I agree. For the limit example, one might instead say, "As m approaches infinity, the result approaches 1." By definiti
692.
by lutusp 11y ago
> ... this mind-wandering "movement" has, as far I can tell, a couple of web articles written about it and very few people intentionally practicing it. Every scientific theory, every invention throughout history, resulted from
693.
by lutusp 11y ago
> Mind-wandering: the rise of a new anti-mindfulness movement This is absurd. Contrary to the efforts of ideologues, Mindfulness isn't a movement, it's an idea, and there are other equally valid ideas, like creative daydreaming
694.
by lutusp 11y ago
> It's inconsistent to state that we believe that the Big Bang theory is a theory about the origin of the Universe and in the same time state that before some point in time we don't know what happened. If that rule were in forc
695.
by lutusp 11y ago
> There is very little that is logical about infinity itself ... On the contrary, infinity is a very logical notion -- much more logical than many other ideas we accept. For example, what value must "m" have for this statement
696.
by lutusp 12y ago
I gave up on cataloging the many grammatical and spelling errors in this post, but this one stood out for its unintended wit: "Farming actually lowered many heath indicators ..." Indeed, it's uncontroversial that farming degr
697.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Bitcoin poker exec: “I was led out in handcuffs in my underwear” Sounds uncomfortable -- and don't the police frisk suspects any more? How could they overlook handcuffs in someone's underwear?
698.
by lutusp 12y ago
Quote: "It only took Roy a minute to discretely nudge the pile ..." A small, barely detectable but finite nudge? Or did the author mean to say "discreetly"?
699.
by lutusp 12y ago
"The lever, the transistor, the vacuum tube and the computer all have something in common. They’re amplifiers, they allow a relatively small change or capability in a domain to have a much larger effect." The article's premis
700.
by lutusp 12y ago
Unless it's the name of a class, not a variable.
701.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Apparently, people who prefer underscores are more likely to follow through. Or perhaps they're predisposed to underscore their arguments. :)
702.
by lutusp 12y ago
Not mentioned in the article is the fact that an underscored file can be algorithmically converted to camel case, but not the reverse (with any reliability). Therefore camel case has higher entropy, lower information content, and is less fl
703.
by lutusp 12y ago
Quote: "A simple protocol can give us an idea of whether data is being sent to Dropbox: 1. Create a large-ish file (1MB) outside of the Dropbox folder 2. Monitor the network usage of the Dropbox application to see if it sends enough da
704.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Hyperbolic? Well, it is right at the beginning of The Making of the Atomic Bomb, and it's Rhodes' hook used to introduce the bigger story. Then I retract my comment (too late to edit it) -- Rhodes' book is first-rate, on
705.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Rapid interconversion between vector and bitmap formats remains hard. More important, if you abandon the vector form in favor of a bitmap, there's no going back -- information is irretrievably lost.
706.
by lutusp 12y ago
> What still remains to be solved in terms of Graphics Programming? That's not a particularly useful question, because the direction of graphics programming is steered more by improvements in hardware than software. For example, I c
707.
by lutusp 12y ago
> This article doesn't even mention Fermi! Or Leó Szilárd, who had the original idea for nuclear fission, supposedly while crossing a street: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le%C3%B3_Szil%C3%A1rd Quote: "The
708.
by lutusp 12y ago
> GPs will tell you that this is wha they say to most patients. Yes, and when that happens, which it certainly does, it's not science. Are you sure an example from medicine that follows the same pattern as psychology, somehow valida
709.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Even though its [sic] only the 18th largest human feat of engineering right now, because of its innovative construction techniques and placement in the landscape, its [sic] likely to outlast almost all of the others that have topped it
710.
by lutusp 12y ago
> You dont [sic] get it. I said its [sic] better for company. Ofc its [sic] worse for you ... Only explanation -- a broken apostrophe key.
711.
by lutusp 12y ago
What a shame. I've been involved with Sage for a number of years and I find it very useful. I didn't realize it was languishing in quite the state that Stein describes. It would be a shame if it morphed into an expensive online su
712.
by lutusp 12y ago
> "Establish causes and then measure effects" is not only wrong, its non-sense. All right, so you don't understand science. It's not fatal, and you're hardly alone. From Aristotle, through Francis Bacon, to the p
713.
by lutusp 12y ago
Not likely. Many of these indicators are tangentially related to depression, they're not causative agents -- or we don't know enough to be able to make that claim. This may seem to be a trite example, but many diseases are accompa
714.
by lutusp 12y ago
> It is _very_ difficult to accurate diagnose these disorders and then half the time people don't believe you anyway. Fair enough. Which do you think is worse -- a false positive or a false negative? I ask because this diagnostic ca
715.
by lutusp 12y ago
> Having posted this link, I feel bad for calling attention to a weak study when I'd only read the press release. There's no need to feel bad about this. People here are pretty sophisticated about this topic and we welcome disc
716.
by lutusp 12y ago
Quote: " ... a breakthrough approach that provides the first objective, scientific diagnosis for depression." Wait ... an "objective, scientific diagnosis" that doesn't identify the cause of the ailment? If I visite
717.
by lutusp 12y ago
> I don't know if it's illegal. I do know that it's perfectly moral. In the U.S., unless you have a business relationship with the recipients, it's both illegal and immoral. It violates the U.S. federal Can-Spam Act.
718.
by lutusp 12y ago
Sure -- just move to a small, isolated foreign country and set up an email distribution system that relies on compromised windows machines (i.e. bots) instead of your Gmail account. In other words, these limits are in place for a reason. If
719.
by lutusp 12y ago
> This doesn't change my opinion that there's no reason modern websites are opening shells—and nothing you've said provides evidence of that. What? Evidence of your opinion? I live in reality, one not informed by opinions,
720.
by lutusp 12y ago
It's just an example, and I chose the example precisely because it can't be used in modern times, and I explained that the example wouldn't work . Why should I offer working examples for black-hat hackers in a public forum?

More ›