jpcooper

Protein and heat.

Not really sure on number 7 there. Can anyone explain?

But you could hold the mug/pot over the bin.

I would like to discuss the after brew process. Can anyone explain why they put the teabag in the sink and not directly into the rubbish? There must be reasons behind this.

In Turkish voltage is known both as voltaj and gerilim. Gerilim means tension, coming from the verb germek, which means to stretch. I think tension is a good analogy, and fits with the idea of potential and springs.

People might also be interested in sc (spreadsheet calculator): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sc_(spreadsheet_calculator)

If anyone wants to learn more about paranormal activity in Cornwall, they can check out a relevant episode of Fortean TV, a fantastic documentary series from the 90s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aEX3Z3mjCk.

Agreed on linked lists in Haskell if you’re doing forward iteration. You can have lazy byte strings under the bonnet while providing a ‘pure’ linked list interface. No worries about explicit iteration.

I remember the linked list being useful to solve Leetcode-style questions involving LRU (least recently used) caches.

Location: Probably Istanbul, UK/TR citizen, EU residence permit

Remote: Only

Willing to relocate: Most probably not

Education: Pure mathematics BSc. and CS MSc.

Technologies: Haskell, Scala, Python, C, C++, J, Linux, more

CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bCv2SzEe_ZZXkzRNqSoHLDqDGut...

Email: paston.cooper@gmail.com

Stuff I've been interested in recently: Built with some tips from HN an automated system for playing Betfair's Exchange Hi Lo card game based on an exact odds calculation algorithm I discovered. Only to find that there was no liquidity at the calculated odds.

Did some free Betfair sports betting data analysis in various markets.

Currently looking into crypto.

Looking for: Anything fun you want to work on together that isn't crypto that will potentially make money, with a minimal number of people involved. I am open to ideas.

I am not fixed to one specific technology. Anything that works. After years of Haskell I have found myself mainly coding in Python recently. Get prototype running, then optimise where needed.

I remember this being a common fear in the UK during the 90s. I cannot report on whether such vans actually existed.

I always thought Francis Bacon was a decent chap. The artist, that is.

What's the best free jazz these days and in previous days?

TLDR: Troll-piece, that cannot actually be serious, written by self-professed green hacker whose fluttering and tenuous sense of meaning, value in life and connection to the universe are challenged by the existence of things like Bitcoin, the absurdity inherent in nature, Versace, and an artist’s shit in a can that sold for over 100k at Sotheby’s according to Wikipedia.

This seems to have parallels with the laws of thermodynamics.

Termessos is one. An ancient Greek city up a mountain. Imagine an amphitheatre with a view in every direction. The burial site is open for you to climb around and over. It's near Antalya. Check it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termessos

If anyone wants to find out more about solar-powered, off-grid bicycles, the BEHEMOTH (big electronic human energized machine) solar-powered (recumbent) bicycle really inspired me as a kid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dItCJUuFY4U

Not only 3-space. An example of a slice knot would be a normal 1-dimensional knot suspended in 3-space which turns out to be the 3-dimensional slice/cross-section of a 2-dimensional sphere suspended and knotted in 4-space.

Thanks for the links. I memorised a number of decorative knots as a kid, but it never really occurred to me then that they were formed of smaller parts. That didn’t seem to be necessary at the time. Also, you do have prime knots, which are not decomposable in a certain way.

How is he wrong about GIT?

What more general systems of computation are there than Turing? Are any in use? Are they really more general?

The claims of the generality of Actors seem to rely on continuous time and non-determinism. Actors, determinism, non-determinism, concurrency and the completeness axiom are models which we can use to express computation and our surroundings, and nothing more.

One man says lambda, another says actor. Given our models of physics; given Planck and Heisenberg, are they really different? If so, how? Measure theory rests on the completeness axiom, but it is just a very useful axiom.

Am I missing something?

Carl Hewitt, the inventor of the actor model, wrote this paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003, which he posted a link to on a recent post here on Erlang.

In it, he claims that Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is not true, and that the actor model is more general than the Turing machine. I am open to entertaining the idea.

I've seen that his ideas have been discredited elsewhere on HN. I would be interested to know people's opinions on this, as a lot of the paper went over my head.

Looks like he's running from a shell. Can't he just press C-z?

Implementation in J of a more general form of Conway's Game of Life.

I have been giving Python a go for writing a programme which concurrently scrapes and collates data from multiple sources.

I chose to figure out how to do this in Python instead of my usual Haskell because I wanted to see how productive I would be compared to how I did similar things in Haskell. I wanted to get away from what I call type-wankery, which the author seems to be complaining about as well.

I’ve been using the Python asyncio library and have been thinking that Python could certainly do with monads in this context. Then I remembered what a ball-ache stacking monads is. In any case, I can’t help seeing programmes in an algebraic context after using Haskell.

The author, and many people who complain about types, seem to forget that types and interfaces exist whether or not they are explicitly defined.

Is the problem with such an attractive type system that they lead to people defining interfaces before they are fully explored? In that case, maybe it could be argued that a less attractive type system would keep people away from so much type-wankery.

It’s hard to know where the best balance is. I am considering F# now. It also seems to have working IDEs, which is nice.

A lot of human networks are more connected than square and triangle lattices. I wonder whether there is a way of taking a number of connected nodes, somehow extracting and looking at the interaction relevant to a sub-lattice, and generalising the result to the whole network. Am I being optimistic?

I wonder how the multiple graph ‘levels’ (which could interact with each other) would come into play. EXCHANGES, BROKERS, HEDGE_FUNDS, INTERNET_PIPES, PEOPLE.

What existing tools are there for analysing information propagation like in the paper?

Thanks for the tips.

Any migrants from Haskell to F# who have used it for larger projects and can compare the two? I’ve used Haskell on and off for a number of years for a number of small projects, and I’m considering moving to F# for better IDE and debugger support, and I’m wondering whether there are any downsides in comparison to Haskell which I should consider. Any result-based advice would be appreciated.

Lots of ways of generating fun pictures in A New Kind of Science (https://www.wolframscience.com/nks/) as well.

Pierre Cardin’s net worth was apparently 800 million USD according to a quick internet search. That is quite a few bucks. Maybe Pierre Cardin has a couple of lessons to teach us.

‘Geen poep op de stoep’ applies to both meanings as well.