woopwoop

22 ms·

181.
by woopwoop 5y ago
Evil 2048, where the new blocks are placed adversarially instead of randomly: https://aj-r.github.io/Evil-2048/
182.
by woopwoop 5y ago
> Everyone is too conservative. Interesting. Do VCs outperform the S&P 500 in general?
183.
by woopwoop 5y ago
I think his (gruez's) interpretation is the obviously reasonable one, and I'm not sure why he's getting bashed so severely here. Note that op made the claim that "net pay" was literally negative, which seems to comp
184.
by woopwoop 5y ago
"Recipe for success: under-promise and over-deliver." I have never seen evidence that this is true in general. The field I got my PhD in has breakthrough papers with titles like "The Euler Equations as Differential Inclusions
185.
by woopwoop 5y ago
I don't find this compelling at all. I'm not in the least convinced that there is a way for a classical computer to determine how many pieces a dropped teapot will break into given an arbitrarily detailed description of it's
186.
by woopwoop 5y ago
But I think the LSD number is literally zero, ever.
187.
by woopwoop 5y ago
As far as I know, there are literally no deaths attributable to LSD overdose. It is safe (if only in the sense of acute poisoning) to take even at much higher than the typical dose. On the other hand, thousands of people die of alcohol pois
188.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Oh I wasn't claiming it's O(n), just O(n^{1+epsilon}) for any epsilon > 0. Indeed, the function inside your O is dominated by n^{2 + epsilon} for any epsilon > 0.
189.
by woopwoop 6y ago
I see, thanks. Yeah that kind of thing is definitely above my pay grade.
190.
by woopwoop 6y ago
I'm pretty confident the construction above does not depend on any bound on the growth rate of C_i (or D_i).
191.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Hmm, I guess I don't get it. I feel like if you have such a sequence of algorithms A_i, you can "string them together" to get a single algorithm A which has the property that it has complexity O(n^{1 + epsilon}) for any epsil
192.
by woopwoop 6y ago
On the off chance an expert reads this comment and feels like answering, is there a consensus opinion (or even just your opinion) on what the best result is likely to be? Do people think O(n^2) is actually possible? Edit: shoulda read to th
193.
by woopwoop 6y ago
I agree with the philosophical conclusions here (e.g. I take their point on data augmentation to basically be that the name "data augmentation" is well chosen - it enlarges the restricted real world). I'm confused by the setu
194.
by woopwoop 6y ago
It's worth remembering that up until very recently section 230 was invoked in these debates mostly by people lying about what it says. When such people change their tune and now say we have to reform or repeal it, I think that should b
195.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Why is that relevant?
196.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Is your name Alice? I'm pretty sure I posed the question in the third person.
197.
by woopwoop 6y ago
I guess it depends on whether you think someone has a right to a reputation independently of how they behave. Thanks for your answer, it was very enlightening.
198.
by woopwoop 6y ago
What if the people who were already exposed are currently asymptomatic but contagious?
199.
by woopwoop 6y ago
The last one is different from the rest, but not in a way that is especially relevant I think. No one is confusing the private sector with a right to privacy. The rest seem to me to have an obvious common thread, and it should be possible t
200.
by woopwoop 6y ago
In the last year, differing answers in different societies to the following hypothetical privacy scenario have seemed important. Suppose there is a dangerous, highly infectious novel pathogen which can be spread by apparently asymptomatic p
201.
by woopwoop 6y ago
One of the top reasons given in the petition begins with "it's unbelievable that schools would block such a site." Well.
202.
by woopwoop 6y ago
I think they were being funny.
203.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Perelman's proof of the poincare conjecture.
204.
by woopwoop 6y ago
It's pretty uncommon (read: I've literally never heard of this outside of one obvious famous exception) for math researchers to put something important on arxiv and never submit it to a journal.
205.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Oh I didn't mean to. If anything I was trying to say that this nonsense can't be so easily dismissed as idle talk.
206.
by woopwoop 6y ago
One of the most powerful people in the world literally saying "Short selling should be illegal.": https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/12017814896391618...
207.
When Patents Attack(thisamericanlife.org)
1 points by woopwoop 6y ago|0 comments
208.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Both naked shorting and regular shorting reduce the price of the stock. In the case of regular shorting, there is a sale offer that wouldn't have been and was, and in the case of naked shorting, there is a buy offer that would have bee
209.
by woopwoop 6y ago
This doesn't distinguish between shorting and naked shorting. But in either case I don't understand why I'm supposed to be upset. Is it because the stock price goes down?
210.
by woopwoop 6y ago
Either way the stock price is influenced. In the first case, supply of the share is increased by the fact that A sells B's share, and in the second case, demand is decreased by the fact that instead of buying a share B buys a contract

More ›