187 karma · joined August 21, 2016
"Elements" is a great reference book, but it isn't really a textbook. There's a popular introductory textbook by some of the same authors called "An Introduction to Statistical Learning", which focuses on applications but elides a lot of the mathematical details.
This isn't really the appropriate metric. For example, a strategy which is short favourites and long underdogs needs a win rate much lower than 60% to overcome the house edge (and pay for this software).
Iceland beginning, let alone completing, a major infrastructure project in the 21st century? Impossible.
Shaving Is Too Expensive: https://www.johnwhiles.com/posts/shaving
Your Stuff Is Actually Worse Now: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/23529587/consumer-goods-qualit...
Your Sweaters Are Garbage: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/10/sweat...
This is an odd way of putting it. I think it's better to say that, given some mostly uncontroversial assumptions, if one is willing to assign real number degrees of belief to uncertain claims, then Bayesian statistical inference is the only way of reasoning about those claims that's compatible with classical propositional logic.
This is doubly wrong.
First, it conflates languages and writing systems. Malay and English use the same writing system but are different languages. American Sign Language is a language, but it has no standard or widely-adopted writing system. Hakka is a language, but Hakka speakers normally write in Modern Standard Mandarin, a different language.
Second, it's not that case that Unicode aims to encode all writing systems. For example, there are many hobbyist neographies (constructed writing systems) which will not be included in Unicode.
I have a work-in-progress PDF edition of it on GitHub here: https://github.com/jdonland/mirrorshades