HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

howardcurry

9 karma · joined July 30, 2019

submissionscomments
howardcurry··on One-Bit Computing at 60 Hertz
Well, that's because you haven't made any submissions. The search only searches for stories (i.e. submissions) by default. Change the pulldown menu field that reads "stories" to read "comments" and it finds all of your comments.
howardcurry··on One-Bit Computing at 60 Hertz
It doesn't find any stories, but if you search for comments, it finds things.
howardcurry··on One-Bit Computing at 60 Hertz
"Dr_Jefyll" works.
howardcurry··on A Programmer’s Regret: Neglecting Math at University
I don't agree that a-priori truths are limited to axioms—it's a much larger category of "necessary" truths. A theorem which has been proved is an a-priori truth.

Sure, programs are proofs in the context of Curry-Howard. But not necessarily proofs of what you want them to prove.

howardcurry··on A Programmer’s Regret: Neglecting Math at University
This is a facetious comment that others have made: https://twitter.com/pigworker/status/913454521610842114

One issue that it glosses over is that in mathematics, the object of study is a-priori truths (and mathematicians are usually Platonists). I would express this as saying that math is interested in knowing what's true. So obviously it is applicable to proving things about programs. So far so good.

But programming involves a lot of work which could be described as a-posteriori. As an example on dictionary.com puts it, "an a posteriori argument [...] derives the theory from the evidence". Programmers are designers, wrestling sense out of complex and sometimes poorly expressed specifications, requirements, and realities. This doesn't map onto mathematics: it's neither (in Gowers' terms) theory building nor problem solving, because mathematical theory building is an a-priori business dealing reflexively with mathematical tools, not with theories of the outside reality. A typical large software system is an unwieldy, organic thing, to which mathematically formulated theories apply in the same way as they do to biological organisms. Sometimes math can describe aspects a complex system well, but it can't tell you how to build it, any more than it can tell you how to build the Parthenon.