xamuel

97 ms·

841.
by xamuel 9y ago
>Your team will not do that because it's a job security to them Every team I've ever been on [albeit that's only two], it's the opposite, if the devs had their way they'd spend all day every day simplifying and r
842.
by xamuel 9y ago
We even take this for granted in the way text flows. Bash: new text goes on bottom. Twitter: new text goes on top.
843.
by xamuel 9y ago
The solutions presented fail if one of the values in obj is a function. E.g., JSON.parse(JSON.stringify({foo:x=>x})) returns {}. It's not intuitively obvious what the "correct" solution ought to be. If cloner is a deep-c
844.
by xamuel 9y ago
The author's problem is he's cast his net way too wide. Even if we limit ourselves to e.g. Rolling Stone Magazine's "Top 500 albums of all time", it would take a decade to deep-listen all 500. With that much super-h
845.
by xamuel 9y ago
It doesn't have to be limited to 10. One day I realized my music tastes were determined by random chance and I was just listening to more of the same. So I started seeking out critically acclaimed albums, and listening to them repeated
846.
by xamuel 9y ago
You're confused. Only very basic arithmetic is needed to prove that any particular TM halts (if it does halt). You might have meant to say something like, "can only prove that N of the Busy Beavers are really Busy Beavers".
847.
by xamuel 9y ago
When philosophers study mankind's knowledge, it's more typical to study the things mankind would ideally know at the end of all time assuming mankind could continue forever. (Formally: the knowledge predicate is usually assumed to
848.
by xamuel 9y ago
>we can easily go to their twitter to confirm Unless the tweet has been deleted (which it often will have been if it's damning)
849.
by xamuel 9y ago
Counterexample: The Four Color Theorem (which states that any 2-dimensional map can be colored with four colors such that no two bordering countries have the same color). It is considered proven even though the proof involves a giant compu
850.
by xamuel 9y ago
I did my postdoc work in the UK, as a US Citizen. After getting the job offer and being sponsored by UCL, it took months for them to grant me a visa, and it cost thousands of dollars just to apply for one. (That's just what I had to p
851.
by xamuel 9y ago
When entertainment agents are too powerful, it leads to more and more draconian intellectual property law.
852.
by xamuel 9y ago
The French got their revenge by giving us Coq
853.
by xamuel 9y ago
I theorize it's the opposite way. If you take less money, you'll be respected less because you were willing to work for less.
854.
by xamuel 9y ago
You didn't say the answer has to use O(1) space, so I'd just throw the nodes in a WeakSet, and when I reach a node that's already in the WeakSet, that's the start of the loop. Or better yet, use a WeakMap to associate n
855.
by xamuel 9y ago
Suppose I wanted to embed your solution itself into a template literal. It would look like this: `${'`'}Look, this is a backtick: \${'${'`'}'}${'`'}`
856.
by xamuel 9y ago
Template Literal Revision [1] is a welcome change, but still falls way short, as there's still no way to easily include the backtick itself inside raw text. I wish ES would adopt python-style triple-quotes, so you could do things like:
857.
by xamuel 9y ago
The weirdest thing is when navigating to an HD video is slow, individual folders take entire seconds to open up, then when you finally get to the video file and open it, the video runs smoothly and perfectly. What on earth is the file navi
858.
by xamuel 9y ago
I can learn the 15 pages of standardese and it'll apply uniformly to every program. The 20 lines will contain some subtle surprise at the worst possible time.
859.
by xamuel 9y ago
That is not a step toward simpler code. Under that proposal, people looking at your code will have to look up definitions of basic things that ought to be keywords---like "interface"---in order to reason about the code.
860.
by xamuel 9y ago
Of course you can prove any statement. The statements only hold for things which satisfy the axioms. "If X is a model of ZF where 1=0, then X also satisfies anything else you want." (Fine, there is no such X so who cares.) You
861.
by xamuel 9y ago
It's better to think of axioms as definitions. If the axioms are inconsistent, it just means nothing satisfies the definition, which isn't the end of the world. People have spent time studying hypothetical properties of polynomi
862.
by xamuel 9y ago
The grass is always greener. I switched to software dev from academia. There, instead of whiteboard tests, it was all about networking, letters of recommendation, having the right advisor, etc. I'll take the whiteboard any day!
863.
by xamuel 9y ago
A different viewpoint: "adding a new axiom" is synonymous with "further restricting the things under discussion". Imagine biologists decide that "DAG" is the correct abstraction for parent-child relationships.
864.
by xamuel 9y ago
Ok, you're presenting to an audience consisting of lots of tables, each with at least one person at it. You say: "Will every table please have a representative stand up." To question the AC is to suggest that for some confi
865.
by xamuel 9y ago
The AC is necessary[1] because at each of the infinitely many steps, you have to choose which of possibly several candidates to use. [1] As mrmyers points out, you actually only need a weaker version of AC, called Countable Choice.
866.
by xamuel 9y ago
I spent awhile as a weather forecaster in the USAF. I got a strong impression the weather squadron's purpose had nothing to do with predicting weather, and everything to do with providing an additional scapegoat when things go wrong.
867.
by xamuel 9y ago
My favorite application of the Axiom of Choice, which Computer Scientists will appreciate: Theorem ("Konig's Lemma"): If a tree has infinitely many nodes, and every node has only finitely many children, then the tree must ha
868.
by xamuel 9y ago
Consider something like the Cartesian product of countably infinitely many copies of the naturals: this is nothing more than the set of all countably-infinitary tuples (n1,n2,...). It's obviously nonempty, e.g. because it contains
869.
by xamuel 9y ago
This just means management sucked at recognizing real talent. Real talent includes knowing how to pick low-hanging fruit, knowing how to make the challenging problem look simple, knowing how to work with a team.
870.
by xamuel 9y ago
Not a mathematical theorem, and not quantitative, but Campbell's Law is relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell%27s_law

More ›