xorand

A js lambda to graphs parser and reducer https://mbuliga.github.io/quinegraphs/lambda2mol.html

Funny how words meanings change in time. The original Plato's Academia vs today's academia. Socrates was a "corrupter of youth" too. The word "supremacy", as in "quantum supremacy" is much discussed now but why would anybody risk his career to complain about the alliance of ACM with Elsevier against Open Access?

As I said many times, the organizations which support the publishers is the problem. Lots of money go to publishers pockets because academic management support them.

Since you like my comment, then why not go further. A computer, any computer, is just a blank slate. This is a matter of nature vs nurture, in computer language: a matter of programming. Good programming practices is all we need...

OK, now, what is this subject anything else than massive stupidity?

Let's not forget that "computer" was a job mainly done by women. The name "personal computer" is telling, just look at the games from the era when PCs were new, to understand what was in the mind of those privileged teen males. It is not surprising at all that now the same people come with "supremacy", a word which could be easily replaced by "slowness challenged".

>Saving pages as HTML is not ideal because a) you get an HTML file plus a folder, not very practical if you want to retrieve them later, and b) you never know how that page is going to render in future versions of your browser.

Yes but for my use case, which is better scientific communication means, PDF is not enough.

Consider for example slides for a presentation. The typical mathematician does them in TEX which outputs a PDF. Then the PDF is (sometimes) made available online. I realized that PDF slides are far inferior to HTML slides (where you can add demos and whatnot, shameless example [0]). Just put all in a github repository and anybody can take them home.

[0] https://mbuliga.github.io/emergent-10-years/presentation.htm...

Constructive proofs are equivalent to programs. But until somebody writes the program, there are always details, context, style, etc which make a proof understandable by a human but not a program. A program is more rigorous than a proof, in this sense.

>...an article puts the abandonment rate of open source projects on Github at about 98% - meaning that there is no activity on 98% of projects after a year [0]. This has coined a phrase - abandonware.

I'm not a programmer, I'm a researcher. Let me tell you a fact: about 100% of research articles are not updated.

Somehow the link [0] cited in the article makes an indirect similar point, but what's wrong with programs which are not updated? After all there is a (small) group of people who keep telling that programs are the next level in mathematics, (ideally they are) better than proofs.

[0] https://www.techrepublic.com/article/open-source-failure-is-...

Molview is open source (and a great project imo) http://molview.org/

> I see a lot of people with books, TV interviews, and academic positions complaining about being "silenced" despite still being very audible.

such as? And how can you complain about opinions which you can't find easily just by looking at those which you can?

I use javascript, especially with d3.js

>" There's an inverse relationship between quality of video and accuracy of information"

This is a quote to remember. You nailed it.

... except in the movies.

Make it public

You know what "the map is not the territory" means, right? That one should not make a confusion between reality and (any form of) bureacracy. Now, technically any interaction a real person has on the net is influenced by the map of the person, i.e. by the classification of that real individual. The classification does not have to be geographically centralized, it is enough that the tags the real individual is blessed with by algorithms can travel effectively with the individual. This is technically possible and it is the root of the problem. So not that _they_ know, but that my interactions with other people are mediated not by the territory, but by the map. Who owns the map owns the territory, this way.

You can see that this is the problem in many places. One of those places which springs to mind is that, for example, Google argues that they are just like any user of the (infrastructure of the) internet. But whenever two individuals interact via anything Google, the communication goes mediated by Google. In a sense it is centralized, and there is a centralized map, even if physically spread between variously located data centers.

There is a famous analogy, I forgot the source (maybe Cory Doctorow?): why do you have a door at your toilet? everybody knows what you are doing there.

So I don't need any of your private data. I voluntarily post my own, as concerns my passions. But let me choose what I make public and what I don't. That's the point.

(I don't use Amazon. All my work is public, I use only free software, even at home.)

>What is it that you want to do that these technologies are preventing you from doing?

Please make public all your (accounts,passwords) or at least post publicly all your communication. What is it that you want to do that these actions would preventing you from doing?

Wait, they spent extra $30 billions in a quarter for research, development and marketing?

"Alphabet reported that its revenue rose 20 percent to $40.5 billion for the third quarter, but that profit dropped to $7.07 billion. Profit, which missed Wall Street forecasts, was hurt by rising costs for research and development and marketing, the company said."

Great idea! I was thinking about how to make votes (aka likes) more like real votes. Maybe by updating the number of likes of a post once every 6 hours.

Started as a joke here on HN, there is a series of predictions based on a numerical correspondence between the intervals [1436,+\infty) and [1969,+\infty), where:

- 1436 is the invention of the printing press and

- 1969 is the start of the ARPANET.

Many of them are postdictions (to validate the correspondence) but the funny thing is that the series ends in the year 2024, where there is a sort of singularity, because the interval [1436,1969] maps to [1969,2024].

https://mbuliga.github.io/gutenberg-net.html

EDIT: Re: the chemistry, I do think that it might be a big subject, see https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.04960 , which somehow is not very surprising because of the Algorithmic Chemistry (aka ALCHEMY) of Fontana and Buss.

Sure, look at [2]. I commented on your github repo too.

I wanted to point you to two almost similar efforts [0] [1] then I found your post [2]. You may be interested also in [3].

[0] https://github.com/moonad/Formality

[1] http://imar.ro/~mbuliga/chemlambda-v2.html

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/dih8xu/optimal_red...

[3] https://mbuliga.github.io/kali24.html

Heh, I read SJW and it totally made sense.

On another thread [0] [1] "My Google account got suspended because of NewPipe". No place to hide.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21247759

[1] https://github.com/TeamNewPipe/NewPipe/issues/2723

On another thread [0] "China's New Cybersecurity Program: No Place to Hide". No place to hide.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21241712

Are there any legal consequences if Sci-Hub is hosted in China?

Yes, not scam, but there is none which returns something back to the society. There is therefore no use case.

Excellent article. A relevant link would be the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) https://sfdora.org/

Back to the article, lots of gems, like:

>Today's researchers can publish not only in an ever-growing number of traditional venues, such as conferences and journals, but also in electronic preprint repositories and in mega-journals that offer rapid publication times.

Did I just read a very normal point of view of a researcher putting on equal footing electronic preprint repositories and mega-journals?

The BOAI Open Access preachers surely can't believe their eyes :) Heresy! (No researcher was involved in the BOAI flawed definition of green OA as archiving and gold OA as publishing.)