ukj

20 ms·

151.
by ukj 5y ago
You are asking me to provide the hypothetical implementation for a real-world function? I don't know how to respond to this. Just observe the thing I am showing you. THAT is what I am talking about. It's right before your eyes - I
152.
by ukj 5y ago
>There are many ways of comparing functions. Indeed. I pointed this out and provided a link in my first post on this thread. >You don't see them because they are implicit! The fact that my function takes no arguments is implici
153.
by ukj 5y ago
You know what the state of the universe is when you do logic? Tell us more! I didn't believe in omniscience until now. Time.now(t1) and Time.now(t2) is meaningless in this context because t1 and t2 are unbound variables. What are you p
154.
by ukj 5y ago
So you looked at your watch twice at the same time? The English sentence "Now is not Now" describes my thought process (1st person view), not my body language (3rd person view). My thought process occurs over time. Exactly like th
155.
by ukj 5y ago
Where is the "explicit simultinaity" in looking at your watch twice? The English and Ruby terms map 1:1. Now(Time.now) is not(!=) Now (Time.now) Why do you call the correct "incorrect"?
156.
by ukj 5y ago
We are talking about function declaration not implementation, right? The expression A = A can be trivially re-written in another notation as equal(A,A) . The reason you don't question the implementation of the equal() function is
157.
by ukj 5y ago
What does it mean to compare a function to itself without evaluating it?
158.
by ukj 5y ago
You are talking about a different function. The function I am talking about doesn't take any arguments. [1] pry(main)> Time.now(1) ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (given 1, expected 0)
159.
by ukj 5y ago
Yes! "Now" is not a constant. It's a function. It's a function that takes no arguments. It's also a function that can be lazy-evaluated. f() != f() A != A You seem to be agreeing with me but your response
160.
by ukj 5y ago
I am bringing Ruby into the discussion so that I can simply point to an ostensive/empirical example - it spares all of us from the tedious "define it!" game. It depends on which evaluation strategy you are using. Call by valu
161.
by ukj 5y ago
I am not looking for an a debate; or to be “set straight”. I am telling you that in my model what I am saying is true . Yes I am talking about function invocation. In Ruby: a = lambda { Time.now } a.call != a.call Or… x = “Time
162.
by ukj 5y ago
Indeed I want to communicate with others, but I do not insist on communicating with Mathematicians in particular. I want to communicate with anybody who wants to talk to me about the nature of time. And when we converse about time I want to
163.
by ukj 5y ago
We are not talking about the same computation. What you think I mean is [1]. What I actually mean is [2]. [1] pry(main)> eval("a != a") NameError: undefined local variable or method `a' for main:Object from (pry):1:i
164.
by ukj 5y ago
So you are telling me that I can't choose to declare that A = A is false? Telling me what I can and can't do is an imperative statement...
165.
by ukj 5y ago
Yes well.. Any two objects are the same, except for their differences. Any two objects are different, except for their similarities. "Sameness" and "difference" are abstract assertions. So in saying that you are doing pr
166.
by ukj 5y ago
You mean like the entity which invents/designs/defines the concepts of "substrate", "possibility","necessity" and "existence" ? The entity which measures and then captures regularities in &q
167.
by ukj 5y ago
There are different kinds of "equality", beyond the one you are invoking: https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/equality#DifferentKinds The most obvious example of A != A being true I can think of is the evaluat
168.
by ukj 5y ago
But will a Physicist ever tell you whether time is continuous or discrete?
169.
by ukj 5y ago
The designer is not assumed. I am it. I design formal systems. Formal systems are human inventions. Any expression or description of the “laws of thought” are subject to the limits of self-expression and the expressive power of your formal
170.
by ukj 5y ago
This article does a great deal to point out the problem, but then just kicks the can down the road. Yes, metaphysics comes before Logic but metametaphysics comes before metaphysics. Ad infinitum. All this does is shift the discussion from t
171.
by ukj 5y ago
Because brilliance is about the people not about the technology it is political by definition
172.
by ukj 5y ago
I’ll try make the point one last time then let you be. “Brilliance” is a human attitude towards technology. It is not an intrinsic property of technology.
173.
by ukj 5y ago
Would you say the 99.99% reduction in travel time is “brilliant”? Me, I like sight seeing. A bicycle ride sounds brilliant. Even though it is much slower.
174.
by ukj 5y ago
The "brilliance" of any technology is not intrinsic to the technology. It's determined by humans. It's always politics.
175.
by ukj 5y ago
It's called "learning a new language". You know what you want to express - you don't know how to express it in a way that your interlocutor will understand. Whether your interlocutor is a computer speaking Lean, or a hum
176.
by ukj 5y ago
Mathematics in isolation is a social anti-pattern. Individuals keep arriving at the same conclusions, but they invent different notations/languages to express those results. Communication stalls. Tribes form around languages/style
177.
by ukj 5y ago
>Where special behavior is needed for routes of different kinds, that behavior can be implemented by using dynamic dispatch in the sense it's usually used. How? A routing function is precisely a M:N mapping with untyped input. It&
178.
by ukj 5y ago
>If it's the latter I'm not really sure how the analogy works—if programming languages are to routers as types are to routing entries, what in a router is analogous to a value of a given type? It's not an analogy. Program
179.
by ukj 5y ago
> I can't think of an instance where an operation would fundamentally require a fixed relation in the concrete types of different routes. For instance, when routes overlap you can derive a priority value for each one to decide which
180.
by ukj 5y ago
The conclusion was my very first post really. Understand the limits of your tools; and your own limits - then make acceptable trade offs. Programming is about explaining desires to computers. It is a complex, error-prone activity and we dep

More ›