xamuel

38 ms·

361.
by xamuel 7y ago
I, for one, care deeply about making my papers readable. I'm outside academia and doing research as a side-hobby, so I couldn't care less about things like tenure etc. So for example, one of my most successful papers [1], I intent
362.
by xamuel 7y ago
On a practical level, for much of mathematics, the intuition and the process often involve complicated hand-drawn diagrams that would be really difficult to typeset (and completely ad hoc, too).
363.
by xamuel 7y ago
I find your comment really interesting because I see things the opposite: the shorter the paper the better, in my view. This is grounded on the general principle that in 99% of cases, any particular paper will only have one really important
364.
by xamuel 7y ago
Also, a lot of peer reviewers have been trained this way, so even if DO make a paper more readable, you might be endangering it from getting published at all.
365.
by xamuel 7y ago
Yes, I was struck by the really exceptional and beautiful presentation/layout of OP's page. Perhaps the real contribution is less "build a better mousetrap" and more "market the hell out of mousetraps". If OP c
366.
by xamuel 7y ago
Particularly interesting to think about the memory feats of the ancients--who didn't even have computers. It really makes you wonder what kind of secret techniques ancient bards and philosophers used.
367.
by xamuel 7y ago
Extremely boiled down TL/DR: The author's invention is a spaced repetition system built into an essay, so instead of having the cards isolated, the cards are embedded in the text itself. At a technical level, that's certainly
368.
by xamuel 7y ago
A good religious institution should rise above the fray and not even bother fussing about something like this. No-one who would otherwise have accepted Christ would have rejected him based on that study. It's the religious equivalent o
369.
by xamuel 7y ago
Well then, I'll create a journal which constantly publishes garbage and instantly retracts 99% of it. By your logic, the remaining 1% should be ultra, iron-clad trustworthy! :)
370.
by xamuel 7y ago
>philosophers who don't understand AI If you mean "philosophers who don't understand ML/gradient descent/linear algebra/statistics etc", I don't think many philosophers are debating about that stuf
371.
by xamuel 7y ago
For a program about classroom-scheduling, it would be nice if you could use "class" as a structure name. Then you could declare a function as taking a "class" as an argument. But if "class" is a reserved keywor
372.
by xamuel 7y ago
It's not intended as a joke, and please have patience with me if I'm an idiot. Imagine you had a program involving, say, chairs. It has things called chairs, which you pass around to functions which take chair arguments. Suddenly,
373.
by xamuel 7y ago
What exactly is it about 3D that becomes harder to grok? You can still abstract things away by passing around pointers to C structs.
374.
by xamuel 7y ago
The author despises OOP, and I agree with him there. I would add that OOP can be particularly bad for games , because often times the OOP vocabulary clashes with the game's own vocabulary: the game itself has objects (as in, things th
375.
by xamuel 7y ago
Or even better, compile with a C compiler with proper flags set (like -Wall). Catch lots of bugs and also enjoy blazing fast compile time!
376.
by xamuel 7y ago
Makes me wonder if the original was even more better :)
377.
by xamuel 7y ago
I used to think that way until I actually read The Odyssey. I used to suffer under the delusion that all things advance like technology. Thus, I thought, surely a work like The Odyssey must be extremely primitive, as compared to novels writ
378.
by xamuel 7y ago
OP quotes Socrates in Phaed rus talking about the evils of writing. But in Phaed o (yes, a totally different dialog with almost the exact same name), we hear quite the opposite. Phaedo takes place on Socrates' deathbed so might be co
379.
by xamuel 7y ago
Careful of mixing up cause-and-effect. Plenty of hillbillies would love to live on the beautiful California west coast next to the beach, if they could afford it. Anyway, hillbillies was an obvious stand-in for all sorts of bad neighbors, w
380.
by xamuel 7y ago
A lot of people would express the sentiment that their late teens/early twenties (when they lived in college dorms) were one of the happiest periods of their life. OTOH, take the average 35-year-old and put them in the same dorm, and t
381.
by xamuel 7y ago
Rather than just wish rich people would change, it's worth considering why they want home prices out of reach. One possible answer: they want to limit who they live nextdoor to. This sounds dickish, but, overall, on average, it serve
382.
by xamuel 7y ago
But, given x->y, if you prove !y, you can conclude !x, so in a sense kibibu is right (possibly requiring "proved" to be read as "indirectly proved"), and we should give them the benefit of the doubt.
383.
by xamuel 7y ago
>cause to mock it You do realize you're talking about Christianity here, right? As in, people who worship a homeless man who was rejected by his own people, tortured, spat upon, and nailed to a cross beside common thieves. He died
384.
by xamuel 7y ago
How does a guy making a prediction make a fool of Christianity? That's like saying if I read a science textbook and then incorrectly predict flying cars by 2020, that I have made a fool of science. Jesus Himself said: "No one know
385.
by xamuel 7y ago
A machine can print the same thing over and over, and yet never repeat its own internal state. For example, "let x=0; while(true) { print("0"); x=x+1;}"
386.
by xamuel 7y ago
Von Neumann said: "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." For practical purpose of getting the completeness theorem to click, my advice would be to stop thinking about it and instead just use
387.
by xamuel 7y ago
This is 1st-order logic so it's a bit more complicated, though you're on the right track (what you stated is the completeness theorem for propositional logic, not first-order logic). Rather than boolean values for the variable
388.
by xamuel 7y ago
Oh I see what you're getting at. I think what you're trying to get at is, "If you had a halting-solver, you could use that like an oracle to answer arbitrary mathematical questions." Unfortunately, this isn't true,
389.
by xamuel 7y ago
You need to be a bit more specific: no matter what kind of true, computable axiom-set you're using (this has nothing to do with 'how much mathematics generally speaking develops'), there will be objectively true mathematica
390.
by xamuel 7y ago
>And if the student asks "well, what if we redefine it so it only works on OTHER algorithms to avoid this one weird edge case" the answer is basically "that's not covered." Only if the teacher doesn't know w

More ›