lying4fun

A naive top of my head explanation: joy seems like something that’s been developed from a friendship that could’ve been roughly labeled by one/multiple of author’s categories. Basically, you feel joy only because you’ve spent time gossiping, confiding, having fun together (etc.) in the past, and at those stages, the relationship would be frameable by some of these categories

Another argument to be made is that, let’s say after having a positive shrooms trip, many people feel joy being with other people even strangers. But that kind of joy doesn’t seem to be a significant sociological force in the western society, which is here being examined

I highly recommend checking out this collective, they seem to be at the intersection of things you suggested

https://www.uva.co.uk/

I’m not familiar with Timothy’s persona/work, why did that repel you?

Care to elaborate on using assisted logins?

I’m not the parent but do you know if there is a system/language that renders programmatic equations in-line in the editor? The closest thing I know of is the usage of Unicode symbols and Greek letters in Lean. I’m imagining a vscode extension that would interpret scientific code/equations and render those in-line or in a preview line above/below. Not sure about the utility of such a thing but it sure seems fun

I bought a used iPad 7 for ~$200 the other day, main reason being reading textbooks at a retail store where I work. What I found surprisngly enjoyable is what the parent mentions - reading HN threads, twitter, blogs. Even watching youtube is a different experience. All of those activities just feel easier and more relaxed than they do on my 14” Thinkpad or iPhone 12.

Have you tried reading content on the web on the kindle, as the ones I mention above?

Wild stuff, I had fun

> When not high, my mind wants to do a lot of other things that are generally unimportant and future focused. THC grounds me in the now.

I had a joint-a-night (occasionally more) phase that lasted for 8 months and this resonates with my experience very much. A side effect that I miss dearly now that I am 6 months off of it. Rarely I succeed in trying to emulate it, but it’s still useful as a reference of a better state of mind, so its easier to spot when I stray away too much

>is in some sense a single value. In another sense, it is two values.

What I tryed to say is that the sense in which “exactly one element” is used in the definition of function is inclusive of codomain being R^n, so it confused me why you would provide a function that has a codomain of R^2 as something that suggests deviation from the formalism. It just seemed misleading to phrase it that way

I thought consistently would convey the idea I had, nevermind if it doesn’t

My bad about bijectivity, I see it now, you’re right

> That is the definition of a function, but it's purely a formalism...

Isn’t the function definition meant to be interpreted as “maps consistently to exactly one element of the codomain”? So an ordered pair of R^2 is still one element of R^2

It seems the parent has just mixed up the domain and codomain, because under that assumption he would be right about both the definition and bijectivity

I think this game somewhat agrees with you, because you can score 100% even if it looks like the deviation from the “solution” is not negligible. On the other side I think that “really good kerning” probably matters when it comes to type which is supposed to be looked at for a long time, or when it comes to graphics with much text, it feels like that good kerning consistency adds up to an overall more pleasant sight.

It depends how much you value/respect your co-workers. In a high level team “good insight” can mean “great work”. I am not saying you disagree with this, but you may have made assumptions about the parent’s team and his relation to it. Conversely, a “great work” from a CEO can mean nothing to a person

This is great

That is curious. Could you elaborate or point me to some sources, I would like to investigate that relationship further. I remember Jim Simmons saying that the Renaissance fund employs many physicist PhDs and other kinds of scientists. I thought they were there because of their specialisation but perhaps the reason is what you explained above or both

The MiniTorch book seems amazing, thanks

You might be interested in this https://twitter.com/ZenoRogue/status/1663589972094353418

Every chapter of the OP book has an introduction which has the following subchapters: Objectives, Segue from previous chapter, Motivation, Goals and Warnings for the Reader. Which I really appreciate and I think its a great way to teach stuff, especially mathematics, since all those chapters contextualize the coming topic in various ways. (E.g. I imagine ‘Motivation’ does this with respect to the history and origins of the idea and ‘Segue from previous chapters’ contextualizes it with reference to the stuff reader has learnt so far. I didn’t read anything yet but it looks promising

From an interview[0] with Charles Weiner in 1966 Feynmann reminisces about not wanting to go Princenton and rather staying at MIT after graduating, because “MIT is MIT”, but does so only after being persuaded by one of the professors from MIT. I think he made several remarks of MIT having a high status at the time.

[0] https://www.aip.org/history-programs/niels-bohr-library/oral...

When you proove something you are esentially prooving that a statement logically follows from some other statement(s) for which we know that are true

You can evaluate the validity of a proof by checking the truthfulness of every statement which was used to argue that the proof holds

Miniature example of a proof with relaxed rigor:

Proove that 3+0=3

Proof: The above statement is a direct consequence of the additive identity axiom which states that x+0=x, if x is a real number. So the only thing we need to check is if 3 is a real number, and we know that it is. The statement holds, end of proof

So to check the validity of this proof you could check if that axiom really exists and check if 3 is a real number, if some of those is false than the proof is invalid

Edit: Or imagine that you have a DB full of axioms, theorems, prooven statements which you can use to proove a given statement. Then you could proove something by just referencing those. Eg. in the example above lets say that the neutral identity axiom has id 3, and the fact that 3 is a real number has an id 103. Then I could just say since 3 and 103 3+0=3

Its like saying you are not buying steam games, you are buying pointers to those games. I would say that you are in fact buying games/art, but doing so in a closed environment/ecosystem. An even better analogy is buying skins inside a game

The marketplace you propose could be interesting, but IG already existed with a huge number of artists who’ve already had a following/status/lore. Also there is the exposure to a tremendously broader&bigger audience than any other platform could possibly have. Not saying that migration would be unachievable, but so much would be lost for something that I don’t see come close to being a compensation

Many artists use instagram to display their art, and a big portion of that art is digital and it was intended to be perceived on the screen, so it can’t be collected/purchased in the traditional sense. That’s why a lot of artists I follow and deeply respect were supporting this concept - finally their 3d renders, digital images etc. can enter the art market. See @mikeyjoyce

It is like a democratization of collecting art, instagram being the medium. The motivation for collecting digital art being the same as collecting physical artworks (paintings, sculptures, whatever).

On the other hand, it gives you an opportunity to support the artist you like and get something in return, in a similar fashion bandcamp does with music.