rramadass

8 ms·

121.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Thank You. A classic Mir publication from the Soviet-era.
122.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Relevant: The Annotated Godel: A Reader's Guide to his Classic Paper on Logic and Incompleteness by Hal Prince. A good review - https://eevans.co/blog/annotated-godel-review/
123.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Thank You. This is key to understanding the slide deck shared by the author.
124.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Very Nice; Thank You! Is there a way to get a pdf of the slides?
125.
by rramadass 2mo ago
As with anything, there is a lot of nuance to be considered here. Some scenarios; 1) You don't know anything about the topic i.e. you have not read even some basic papers/articles/books on the topic, do not blog. 2) You have
126.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> if you paid attention in high school. A very hard Nope! No high school teaches you Electrodynamics at the level needed to understand his Relativity/Photoelectric-effect papers, the idea of Stochastic Randomness behind Kinetic theo
127.
by rramadass 2mo ago
You might also want to look at The Annotated Godel by Hal Prince which i mention in another comment. We should read the original great works but with intellectual honesty to accept that some/most of it might be over our heads (depend
128.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> the mechanics and the why are closely intertwined But the "why and what" must always be explained first even if it is incomplete; since that is the problem we are trying to solve. With logic it is even more important since
129.
by rramadass 2mo ago
And the reason for Hilbert's program? The problem of "Russel's Paradox" which is a contradiction in naive set theory - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox (Note that there were other p
130.
by rramadass 2mo ago
We have to agree to disagree then. You definitely need a good background in Physics to understand them. For a general reader, even though they might not get the whole thing they can still get an appreciation for the whole from the commentar
131.
by rramadass 2mo ago
I have tried to read some articles and watch some videos "explaining" Godel but never really understood it. Everyone seems to be explaining the mechanics of what Godel did but explaining the Why is lacking i.e. What was it in
132.
by rramadass 2mo ago
My point is that each of the material above (and i forgot to add the original Quantum Mechanics papers) were major watershed moments in science/mathematics and hence are not easy to read/understand. You need a good background in t
133.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Well said. Thanks for calling out these sort of posers and charlatans on HN. We should not tolerate these people if we are to discuss/argue/motivate interesting/hard subjects productively. I automatically discount anybody on
134.
by rramadass 2mo ago
The Carthusian monks of the Grande Chartreuse - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Chartreuse and a nice documentary on their lives, Into Great Silence - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_Grea
135.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> I want the ability to assert guarantees/contracts at a high level, and then let AI work out the details. I want to force AI to work within the confines of an abstraction, Exactly right! More details in my comment here - https:&#x
136.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> Precise specs must always be given This is the paramount need with AI. Earlier when we were writing code by hand, since both specification and coding were done by us we could easily iterate over them in our head and thus keep them in s
137.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Right; the links i provided above explain it in more detail. WinRT is made up of component dlls and therefore exposes functional interface bundles. But the implementation of these components mostly took the path WinRT -> Win32 api ->
138.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Nice. I should have inferred that you were talking about Racket since some of the papers you had listed were Scheme related. Gradual Typing and similar powerful type systems are not available in the world of C/C++ where i come from (th
139.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Thank You and Appreciate it very much! The 1st, 4th and 7th papers look especially interesting. I think in order to appreciate DbC (gradual typing is whole another beast altogether) one needs to have some idea of "Program Correctness&q
140.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Please add any interviews/articles/videos by the recipients about their work. I found this for Professor Deepak Dhar; 'Earthquakes, avalanches and market crashes have some things in common' - https://www.nat
141.
ICTP Announces 2026 Dirac Medal Recipients (Physics)(ictp.it)
17 points by rramadass 2mo ago|1 comments
142.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Can you share the links to all the papers that you refer to?
143.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> For example, what unique need does a production assertion API satisfy that a normal conditional throw does not? See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49231133 An "assert" is for "impossible to fail&qu
144.
by rramadass 2mo ago
> Asserts ... the condition is supposed to be impossible to be false, just not provable by the type system Very nicely said!
145.
by rramadass 2mo ago
The ASSERT (note caps) macro in Microsoft MFC library does this. It uses a "INT 3" instruction (x86/x64) via "AfxDebugBreak" to invoke the debugger. Since the above is a well-known technique, it has now been general
146.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Ha, Ha ... I have pointed to previous discussions with other HN users where the logic and rationale behind my "say so" are given. If you actually cared to read them you will find quite long back-and-forth on formal methods and a w
147.
by rramadass 2mo ago
You are very right. With linker maps, debug symbol files etc. we can get a good handle on what went wrong. > People would often leave some memory areas (typically circular buffers) with debug values that would be useful in debugging. The
148.
by rramadass 2mo ago
Not this again ... Assertions should only be thought of as predicates on state space to ensure program correctness. Everything else is just a corollary. Some relevant past comments of mine here - https://news.ycombinator.com&#x2F
149.
by rramadass 2mo ago
What are you talking about? I already explained it in the first part of my above comment here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49132199 Here it is replicated again; You have misunderstood what i meant by sharing&#x2F
150.
by rramadass 2mo ago
You don't have to lie or play-up/play-down the language; just say it as it is with no painting of dragons and fear-mongering. It is just another language and not rocket science.

More ›