MikkoFinell

It's better to do it the other way around; begin at the low level and work your way up to the abstractions:

* Foundations of proofwriting and mathematical thinking: Velleman

* Going further into logic: Hindley and Seldin, Lambda-Calculus and Combinators

* Apply what you learned just learned: Sussman and Abelson, SICP

* Getting serious: Awodey, Category theory

* You're there: Haskell

Instead of Lua, I'd like Scheme to have become a more popular language for all those reasons you mention.

Why not just remove the feature for pictures from Getty then, or simply not show their pictures at all? Surely that is within the technical capability of Google.

Wasn't it sourceforge that injected malware into downloaded programs? At least that's what pops into my head every time I see a sourceforge link, and why I avoid anything that's hosted on there.

That's interesting. Unless I'm being forcefed, then who else is to blame? I have free will after all.

Downvoters: I of course meant an authority on anything ELSE than memes and karmawhoring. Sorry for not being clear about that.

The failure is yours alone if you actually consider Reddit an authority on anything.

What about the trend of shutting down or outright physically attacking speakers at collage campuses lately? I'd call that using violence to suppress politically opposing opinions, and it's something that you will exclusively see leftist do against speakers they disagree with. Or concepts such as the Progressive Stack, where people are discriminated against based on race and gender, in other words literally racism. Or any of the other crazy ideas coming out of social justice these days.

What type of IF did you try? And for how long?

The problem is that content providers have a financial incentive to create an environment that penalizes anything controversial and rewards unchallenging posts that regurgitate whatever the lowest common denominator of that community happens to be. Reddit is by far the worst example of this, but it feels like HN is becoming more like that as time goes by.

I exercised every day in 2017, but with varying intensity like the parent suggested. That means some days gym, some days a 3 mile walk, some days a yoga pass, but definitely something every day. It's been so good that one of my resolutions is to continue doing it this year as well.

Another thing that I tried and really enjoyed is the following: I started getting up from my desk once every hour, grab a pair of 7.5 pound dumbbells and do some mini sets of exercise, for example 20 squats, 20 overhead press, and 20 good-mornings. It takes like a minute, but it gets the heart pumping blood to my brain, and most importantly counteracts the "sitting is the new smoking". Give it a try for a day, I believe you might like it.

> Obligatory xkcd

God I cringe every time someone posts that. It's like the "Big Bang Theory" of internet comics.

That's why it seems a bit unreasonable to compare how the police in your country would react to how American police unfortunately reacted in this scenario. Because the situations those officers face on a daily basis is completely different. American cops can reasonably expect to regularly deal with armed and hostile psychos, unlike the cops in many other countries. Again, that's not to say that the shooting was in any way justified, but try to put yourself in the life of American police officers.

How many gun-related homicides are there per year in your country?

It mystifies me why you believe anyone thinks the shooting was justified. Literally NO ONE has said that. Please try to engage with the actual debate instead of making up strawmen to attack.

Should cops have to wait until they are actually being gunned down before they can use force to protect themselves? What happened was an absolute tragedy, and every measure should be taken to avoid anything like that ever happening again. The shooting was not justified, and cops need better training, non-lethal options must be expanded, penalties for this kind of "prank" must be made harsher. Everyone agrees on that. But to call the cop a murderer, as if he had executed someone he knew was innocent, just for fun, that's not right either. Cops face actual murdering psychos on a daily basis, and must be able to respond to how the situation looks at the time. Again, not trying to justify the shooting, but trying to encourage a more nuanced perspective.

Same, but with uBlock instead. I'm shocked every time by how youtube actually looks like when I see someone else using it.

>What sites are unusable?

Youtube.

1) It obviously did not create time, because if time didn't exist then no events could take place, and the big bang was an event. Hence time must necessarily have existed before the big bang.

2) We should expect to find ourselves in a time and place that accommodates observers, see o https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

I believe the thickness of lead required for any significant protection would make the weight of the helmet unreasonable. Unless the exercise you mentioned consist only of weighted neck curls.

A more realistic approach to mitigating the issue is in my opinion to have rotating crews. They would spend most of their time in underground shelters, and only some minor fraction of their time doing surface work. Advances in medicine, specifically in regard to cancer, along with minimizing exposure time, is what I believe will make the risk low enough to be within acceptable bounds.

Yeah in his TED talk he also went into some detail about how easy it is to control the atmospheric pressure in tunnels. The boring technology is just too obviously synergistic with all concerns about habitats on Mars.

I've often found that having all the code that's doing one thing in the same place is better than splitting it up into a bunch of functions just to keep rowcount low. It makes it easier to step through and reason about what is going on if all the steps of a logical sequence are actually laid out in a sequence (instead of intermittently jumping to other files). Whenever I find a function that I discover is only called in one place I just inline it, and in my opinion that improves the code every time. Abstraction is important, but understandability is more important.

It's not just that, in fact the reason for limiting to 80 is mostly because short lines help readability because of how human eyes operate. Eyes prefer to stay within a small circular region located in the center of the visual field. Too much vertical or horizontal movement makes it harder to see, but vertical movement isn't an issue in text because of scroll, but horizontal movement is a problem.

I don't really see why it matters what the motivation was behind it. The point is that Java for some reason seems to be an attractor for that kind of ridiculous code. It is where you end up when taking "OO design" to its logical conclusion. The OO paradigm is like religion: mostly harmless if you don't take it seriously.

The fact that FF users are so critical is a positive feature of the community in my opinion. It's the only thing putting the breaks on Mozilla's campaign to turn FF into a clone of Chrome.

>I'm an anarchist because I think the principles so succinctly put are a good pole star for my personal life.

That's nice to hear, me and my friends feel that way too. BTW we're coming to take your stuff, enslave your family, and kill you of course. Isn't freedom from the oppressive state just great?

Thanks, thats the funniest thing I've read all week.

Canceled my monthly donation because of this.

Why do you presume an alternative is even needed? We did fine before facebook (some would argue better) and we will do fine after it.

You have not made a convincing counter argument.

The set of things humans are in principle capable of understanding at least slightly are covered by the analogy about dogs. Try to imagine the relative complexity of concepts, for example how much more complex the concept of calculus is than the trick to sit when given a verbal command. Now imagine some concept that is equally more complex compared to the most advanced human math/physics as calculus is to the sit-trick. There is some scale of complexity where analogies break down, and even though they convey some concept that is familiar to the audience, its connection to the actual matter is so vague and strenuous that you haven't actually explained anything. There may be facts about the universe that are completely counter-intuitive, and the understanding of which depend on a regression of trillions of other counter-intuitive facts and processes.

We already see computer assisted mathematical proofs heading in the direction where there are simply too many steps for a human to understand. And thats merely us scratching the surface of the tip of the iceberg. At some point, I believe, computers will generate new maths such that not only is the proof incomprehensible, but the result too. There is no reason to believe that the universe is simple enough that humans can understand everything.