QuesnayJr

They're not literal circuit breakers. "Circuit breaker" is the name for exchanges rules that stop trading when the price does something crazy.

There's this incredible denial about the fact that art, which was only ever a vocation for a lucky few, is easier to automate than physical tasks that 99% of us can do. In a way I understand it from the point of artists -- what if the thing that's most human happens to be the thing that I am better at than other humans -- but it's not how things worked out.

I have sometimes wished that "locations" in Common Lisp were real lvalues, rather than an illusion made possible by macros.

Russia was of course incredibly backwards by European standards, but in the run-up to WW1 it was industrializing rapidly. Part of German strategic calculation was that if they waited too much longer after 1914 to fight a war with a modernizing Russia that they would lose.

Plus, it wasn't even the Communists who deposed the Czar. He was already gone after the February Revolution, 7 months before. The main contribution of the Communists to the cause was to spend the next two decades committing mass murder and achieving mass starvation.

Interesting, but

  Rather than organizing the world's information, what if we could organize the world's people?

I do not wish to be organized.

Even the evidence about homo naledi possibly needs correction. Here's a recent preprint that argues that the evidence that homo naledi buried their dead is not there: https://paleoanthropology.org/ojs/index.php/paleo/libraryFil...

I'm surprised it worked out like this. The Perl 7 announcement was the last time I remember Perl getting positive attention.

The idea of using the square is due to Carl Friedrich Gauss when calculating the orbit of Ceres. I suspect he was familiar with the idea of absolute value.

I propose bounties on people who propose putting bounties on AI researchers.

This is a category error, and basically a non-sequitur to the discussion. Whether or not LLMs are conscious is not the topic of discussion (and not a position I've seen anyone seriously advocate).

This is the most hilarious "meet cute" I've ever read.

Reddit is so much better than the average SEO-optimized site that adding "reddit" to your search is a common trick for using Google.

There are two new chatbots on Chatbot Arena, called "late-june-chatbot" and "im-just-another-late-june-chatbot". Both of them report that they are Gemma if you ask. I'm assuming it's these two models, but AFAIK there has been no official announcement.

Since you importing it meant less for the rest of us, "silly" isn't the word I would use either. "Irresponsible", on the other hand, I would accept.

Agreed on the "and then some". These days the burgers in France are much superior to the burgers in the UK (unless you go to Quick or something).

There's lots of terrible pizza in Italy, but Domino's probably has the wrong business model. A regular restaurant will have excellent pizza, of course, but if you go to one of those little storefront places that are open between 2 and 5, when the regular restaurants are closed, there's a good chance the pizza will make Domino's look good. I don't think Domino's is well-positioned to compete with those, though.

"Waifu" is "wife" if written in katakana. It is jokingly used as a name for the fictional female characters in manga and anime that are designed to appeal to male viewers. Some people wish the fiction wasn't so fictional.

If you are cherry-picking cites that agree with you, that is a much bigger scandal than you citing a paper that ended up being retracted 22 years later. The point of citations is to cite the relevant literature, pro and con.

I swear to God that Hacker News is the only place on the entire internet where you could find someone who takes a stock rhetorical phrase like "swear to god" literally.

This is not at all what a citation means. If someone writes a math paper with a correct result, and the proof is wrong, then you cite that paper to give a corrected proof. If someone writes a math paper where a result itself is incorrect, then you cite that paper to give your counterexample. A citation just means the paper is related, not that it's right or you agree with it.

I'm still waiting to see if really does have all of the reported positive effects, but if holds up, then this suggests to me that the negative effects must have a common cause. There's some aspect of modern life that causes compulsive self-medicating behaviors, and we've stumbled on a treatment for it.

When is the Ohio deadline?

I would say yes. I read it when I was already an experienced programmer and I still found it worth it. Scheme is one extreme in terms of styles of programming languages, and it allows the authors to present a certain way of thinking about programming that was still new to me that is natural in Scheme.

I have toyed with writing my own intro.

A lot of category theory is just identifying that a bunch of similar elementary results across algebra and topology can be stated and proved once in a common framework. The examples in ACC serve to show the different guises the elementary results take in different settings, as well as a source of counterexamples. I would guess this is not to your taste.

The only nontrivial theorems of general interest are the Adjoint Functor Theorems, which give very general existence proofs for universal constructions. For that, the chapter in Saunders Maclane's book is probably better.

Though it could be that none of this is worth your time. Category theory inspires intense enthusiasm from some people, but outside of a few areas of math it's not strictly necessary.

Sheaves capture two properties: if you have a solution to a problem on a big piece of a space, you can shrink it to a smaller piece, and if you have solutions on small pieces of a space that agree with each other on overlaps, you can glue them together to get a solution on a bigger piece.

An easy example is a function on a set. If you have function defined on the whole set, you can shrink it to give you a function defined on a subset. If you have functions defined on several subsets, and those functions agree on the overlaps of the subsets, then you can use that to define a function on the union of the subsets. More interesting examples arise in topology and related fields.

Category theory doesn't have to be presented in such a diagram-heavy way. It's just that the people who love category theory also love diagrams.

I don't know one that avoids diagrams as much as possible, but the book "Abstract and Concrete Categories" is not too diagram heavy. I think the PDF is legally available online.

Can't Biden bow out any time before the Democratic National Convention in mid-August? I don't expect that he will, but he could.

If you don't give them a copy of Kernighan and Ritchie, it's child abuse.

I clicked on it because while I knew it couldn't mean the X Window System, I couldn't figure out what it possibly could be. The only time I remember Twitter is called X now is those rare occasions of when I type the URL.

I haven't followed Perl development in a while, but I remember there was a briefly hyped "Perl 7" announcement. Did that plan get dropped?