mrkgnao

> vice after periods

Is vice Latin? It reminds me of pace (because of the "shape" of the word, haha), but I guess it means something akin to except?

And Dantzig himself was known for having mistaken a couple of unsolved problems for homework :)

It might be that, in GP's experience, people who straightaway reply "I love Mozart" are less likely to actually have heard a substantial amount of his work, perhaps to have sat with them for some time, and (for lack of a better word) pondered over them, than someone who says they like something else but replies in a manner that sounds more sophisticated, e.g. "I enjoy the structure inherent in Bach's music" or what-have-you. (I might just be putting words in their mouth, though. Apologies if that's the case.) Answers of the latter kind can indicate that one has actually spent some time thinking about whatever it is one has learned, however elementary it might be. And that's always great!

It's probably the equivalent of someone saying "omg fractals" or "the incompleteness theorems, man, math is broken, I find that so beautiful" in response to "So you like math/CS?" After a while, that becomes a red flag that you learn to small-talk your way out of, albeit with some shame: while I agree with GP, to some extent, I do understand how this can be exclusionary, though. Almost by construction, someone who isn't in really deep is far more likely to have met the parts of a field that have been popularized than other things, and putting them down for this can be counterproductive if you're looking to attract more people or, well, just evangelize. I don't know of a good way out of this.

I do seem to have noticed that this isn't the case if you replace "fractals" by, say, "differential equations" or even "trisection". Maybe what one really needs to avoid in introductory literature is powerful ideas that are easy to lossily summarize for a lay audience in the form of really general, unexpected-sounding incorrect-when-unqualified statements that seem to say profound things about life, the universe, and everything. Leaving off the last condition shouldn't make an appreciable difference in hype/excitement-generating power: you could very well do, say, some topological/geometric staple like the hairy ball theorem, or some knot theory, and so on. That way, you retain the visual appeal that $REALLY_BIG_NUMBER-x zooms of Mandelbrot give you, while significantly decreasing the tendency for the target to go into (partial or full) "woah, dude, everything is connected and I am pure energy" mode in the way that Gödel often does.[0]

As an aside, GEB can be a good (rigorous, even) introduction to a few very powerful ideas. For me, what I call "interpreter-y thinking" was a good example, as was a healthy respect for how complex emergent behavior can arise from simple rules. This is something that's unfortunately hampered by the "bag of really cool ideas" nature that the book seemed to have when I read it four or five years ago.

[0]: I've actually heard the "everything is connected" bit from a good friend who loves watching videos like in TFV, so it isn't entirely a strawman. :)

Just in case you're counting replies, yes! Bring your dad too, it'd be an honor for a ton of people who haven't met anyone from that age, let alone had a parent with stories like that :)

How do you escape an asterisk on HN? Other than

  (a*)*c

which seems to work.

I've seen it in older literature, as "within and without", where the latter approximately translates to "outside" and is supposed to be an opposite for "within".

(I'm Indian, but I can't remember seeing any instances of this in any texts that I'd say were written by people who wrote in an Indian idiom.)

This reminds me of the Joshua Bell-on-a-subway project some years back. :)

: read en-dash

I've been (rightly) downvoted for pointing this out on HN in the past, but one of the main developers associated with the Urbit/Hoon/Tlön/Uqbar/etc project is someone active in the alt-right (although there may be something to say about whether or not that has anything to do technically; I wouldn't know or particularly care).

I'd go further and say it's not complex, but rather complicated. In the same way that (forgive the example) the Vim command language is complex, but the Vim source code (gasp) is, well, very complicated.

I use Emacs (Spacemacs, so maybe that doesn't count!), though, and I'm willing to live with this if it means it can do what it does! :)

Anecdotal (counter)evidence: in India, Reliance ("Jio") has been offering free (which is a first) 4G (I believe only one other carrier offers that) data for a few months now, ending March of this year. (I believe they're using this to both draw users and give people a taste of what a fast mobile data connection can be like as well as to work out teething problems. Nobody's a saint, etc.)

"Take a break!"

Minimal test cases sounds like QuickCheck.

s/bizarre/almost redeeming/ :)

I think bash was (is?) written in that kind of C.

I'd love a reference! This sounds very interesting.

The (intentional?) pun in $CURRENCY made me laugh.

How would someone with no knowledge of the game learn to play poker? Any good books that stress the mathematical/probabilistic(/game theoretic...?) side of things?

Could you not do something like chunk the input and operate on the pieces in parallel? I'd think you could use something like a rope (à la text editors) to support the concurrent writes.

(I may or may not have forgotten the differences between concurrency and parallelism.)

Could you explain? Is it the mozilla part?

In case it helps now: K:// is supposed to be "kill".

Could you not add an explicit link to the article after the title, say, on the AMP pages?

Edit: Ah, yes, your "make the header clickable" fixes this.

Me personally, I dislike AMP but would be fine with some way to copy the goddamned URL of the page I'm on. The way it currently stands, AMP sort of breaks how one intuitively expects browsers to work.

Chromium Code Search sounds sort of similar to Hoogle. Can anyone with experience of both confirm this?

Also -- sort of offtopic, but motivated by TFA -- I'd love some way to find out about quirks that native speakers of $lang have when they speak $otherlang.

A few common "tells" that I know, for $otherlang = Englishf are Hyphenating-Things-Like-This and also spaces before exclamation points or question marks !

Wasn't there some kind of static sites-on-decentralized Internet thing on HN a few weeks back along fairly similar lines?

Macros implemented with ... string interpolation? This looks like a suboptimal idea.

Edit: I spoke too soon. This looks like code generation, and I guess that you ultimately have to do stringy things at some point. But couldn't there be some kind of type-safe mechanism for this?

And a corresponding NVIDIA video?

pinging 'dang and co, typo in title

Looks more like an OEIS sequence identifier to me.

Why do people write ][ for the Apple II? I've seen it in a bunch of places now.

> The myth is tenacious [...]

I love how the article starts!

> In the café’s heyday Flore, regulars would say they were going “à Flore”, rather than “au Flore.”

Does that translate to "in the style of Flore"? Also, I suspect the first Flore is a typo -- or am I missing a pun of some sort?