knappa

It's numerically unstable and O(n^3) (at least, probably worse) when computing via row reduction is O(n^2).

That's not true for x=2 : 2^4 = 6 mod 10 Also, 4 does not divide the order of the multiplicative group of Z/2Z. i.e. 4 does not divide 1. (Also, the claim was that x^5 = x mod 10 not x^5=1, but I assume that's a typo.)

General robot job replacement related issues aside, this robot only holds enough for 50 salads and, based on the video, seems painfully slow. It doesn't seem ready for a lunchtime rush.

This is Penrose's argument. One issue with this line of thinking is that it confuses a system which produces infallible proofs and the human brain. None of those theorems actually apply to people; we may gain quite a bit by being wrong sometimes.

I think that I'll probably clean a bit before I forward this one to my wife.

> I talked to a teacher friend about this, and while he thinks its great, I think it's ridiculous.

It seems to me that having parents and teachers praise hard work are different things. Kids likely aren't looking for the same kind of emotional support from the two.

Relatedly, even evaluating the hardness of hard work would be difficult if you don't observe it. I've had (university) students occasionally tell me that they have spent implausibly long hours studying for my classes. Hey, maybe they aren't lying about the time spent, but my general suspicion is that "studying" consists of opening the textbook and placing it to the side while they play around on Facebook or some such nonsense.

>Give me a motivated adult who understands basic arithmetic, and I can help him or her master algebra in six to eight weeks.

Well, teaching _motivated_ students is easy and fun. The question is, though, what about the semi-motivated students and do either still understand algebra after they are done with you and in their next class?

That's another proposed change in Java 10, both part of Project Valhalla:

http://www.jesperdj.com/2015/10/12/project-valhalla-generic-...

The issues page has a report of the same error (as does my i5-6600) and the author says:

>Ok, I'm /inclined/ to believe that this indicates that the system doesn't implement AMT at all, but I'll try to do some more research.

You could also go for the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Schickele https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._D._Q._Bach

> I don’t need to know how to code or shoot in 360 degrees or big rights to music, but I do need to know the very best people who can.

We can't all be managers.

> We can’t begin to imagine a career in 2020, let alone 2030.

Come on. Those are 3 and 13 years away.

Unless you mean something different from the usual multilinear algebra meaning of "exterior algebra", xy^yz is zero. (It contains two y's.) I think that you must actually mean Clifford algebras. (But there are also signs when in characteristic ≠ 2.)

The amortization is the average and is O(1). The claim is that the worst case (when the table becomes relatively saturated and a resize is required) is O(N^0.5). I don't really buy that and the supplied link doesn't really make that claim either. By the argument in that link, it should be O(N^1.5) for rehashing. (Usually we think that copying N items is O(N), but he makes an argument from physics which I haven't thought through.)

No O(√N) is O(N^0.5)

They are only informally standardized, but are usually quite consistent between colleges/universities. You have single-variable differentiation, integration, and applications. Possibly some of the easier differential equations. The high school advanced placement (AP) curriculum usually goes a bit further but in a less rigorous manner.

And why did they misspell Matrices as "Matrixes"?