pervycreeper

Not a surprise to see pi in there really, since we're averaging over "surfaces" of circles/spheres. In general (spoiler), it does generalize to arbitrary dimensions. We get a rational factor for odd dimensions, and 1/pi * rational for even.

See sections 6-9 here for demonstration: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.0595.pdf

Such an experience could be described as the replacement of one ideology with another, rather than an increase in personality trait openness.

The key "says lawyer" portion of the headline is missing in the title.

The title instantly identifies it as belonging to the genre of vacuous contrarian hot-takes. Without having read it in its entirety either, I would guess that if does make a good point, it relies on confusing the dangers of bad info, excessive application, or selective focus on areas for improvement, for detriments of the enterprise of self-improvement itself.

This requires owning both repositories. The user puts a measure of "trust" in the owner whose repository he had starred already, so this seems more like a violation of that trust rather than an "exploit".

nobody stands to profit from rationally curtailing copyright

Except, of course, nearly everybody.

I've noticed a lot of hair-splitting in these comments over whether this was a failure of peer review, whether to call the papers, considered as specimens of scholarship in their appropriate fields, "fraudulent" rather than "bad", or whether the number of hours they actually logged at the dog park is a relevant concern. All of this is quite besides the point. The researchers passed a version of the Turing Test among the reviewers of their papers. All that we need from that point is an acknowledgement of the absurdity and falseness of the papers themselves. This may not be easily forthcoming, though. One of the reviewers of Social Text took the position, in the wake of Sokal's hoax, that his paper constituted good scholarship, despite the stated intentions of its author. Also confer with Poe's Law. However, when we admit this as a possible response, we are in the territory of radical relativism, with no way to adjudicate between the claims of these scholars and their critics, and for that matter, those of religious fanatics, mentally ill delusional people, confidence scammers, or indeed anybody at all. This is a position which seems, at least, to be somewhat at odds with the fundamental scholarly enterprise. At its heart, one has to cross the pons arsinorum of admitting that, yes, the papers are indeed absurd nonsense. At this point, it seems impossible to convince some people to take this step.

If the critics's objections could be distilled into something with a semblance of validity and germaneness, then it would be that the researchers's methods were too unfocused. But had they taken a narrower approach, the response could just have been to rationalize and ignore. Fight fire with fire (being generality, in this case).

The point of peer review is to stop bad research, not fake research

I would submit that "fake research" is, in fact, bad research.

Can you specify an appropriate forum in which he could have presented his findings to the public without upsetting anyone?

Title is misleading. Really it means to say that the oldest still active torrent is 15 years old.

Someone mentioned tonsils below, but in the past, we also had bloodletting, trepanation, and various other unnecessary excisions. Foreskin may one day join the list (who knows, though). This all raises the question of why medicine is practiced the way it is, with so much appeal to authority and memorization, rather than something more intrinsically scientific. Why do bad practices persist for so long?

You're implying that there's some ulterior-motive Embrace, Extend, Extinguish plan underlying this? Is there anything, however, in what they announced they will do that will have a negative effect, though?

The original IPFS whitepaper mentions Filecoin, so that is one possible incentive, but there are many other ways to incentivize people to keep files available. Constituting a superset of the current incentives for hosting files, at the very least.

Could you explain why you think that Cloudflare's recent effort constitutes an attack on IPFS? That is, wouldn't the pinning of a large number of files, hosted on a fast CDN, be a good thing?

Amazon has no literary opinion

This is not exactly true. Amazon has removed books from its publishing platform based on their content, and even makes pseudo-literary judgements by forbidding "placeholder" or "dummy" text.

I'm not sure what point to take from this, other than to be reminded of the imprecision and conceptual vagueness of the terminology he uses ("order", "balance", etc.)

When was the last time you replaced an iPhone because a metal bracket snapped or something like that? Hard to really keep them accountable on this because of the large lead times involved in assessing the long term durability of their products, so they can just claim whatever they want about it with impunity.

how much for?

By "The Romantic Generation", I was thinking more of Schumann, Chopin, Liszt, and Mendelssohn, all of whom were nearly exact contemporaries (b.1809-1811), and who consciously broke with with the past (including Beethoven), by largely eschewing Sonata Form. Interesting that a century after Reicha, Busoni picked up on some of the same approaches to composition that Reicha had taken once Romanticism had reached an impasse, becoming the de rigueur approach for the succeeding century.

Loved the documentaries. How about Episode 5 'Paris'?

Which is very close to how I feel about Haydn.

Glossed over that part when I first read the comment! It was Haydn who essentially created "The Classical Style", which is perhaps the most perfect mode of musical discourse that humanity has yet encountered. His importance is under-stated in the statement that he is "the Shakespeare of Music". That is all quite apart from the innumerable volumes of individual masterpieces that he created!

The wind quintets were written on commission, for public consumption, rather than being "written for the drawer", as many of the works in this recording series were. Nonetheless, they are still first rate compositions and full to the brim with truly unusual features.

The fact that those innovations are able to go by without being perceived while listening to or even performing them is a testament to Reicha's skill in making unusual ideas "work" musically, despite their strangeness.

Mr. Ilić is, in my view, 100% correct in his assessments regarding the undeservedness of Reicha's relative obscurity.

Didn't mention explicitly Beethoven's influence on Reicha, but I'd say the sonata movement he played at the end of the video (Grande Sonata in C Major) is inhabiting the same sonic world created in the third movement of the Waldstein sonata. IMO, influence was stronger in the Reicha --> Beethoven direction, since he simply adopted many of the same lifelong concerns of Reicha's into his own work around the same time Reicha left Vienna, and becoming even more pronounced in his "3rd period", while Reicha continued steadfastly on his own path.

Could it be that the Hammerklavier fugue, marked "con alcune licenze" is a kind of rejoinder to Reicha's Op. 36, about which he is said to have remarked, "daß die Fuge keine Fuge mehr ist"? What about the fugue in the D Major cello sonata, with its displaced accents and unusual structure? Could it be a riff on the compound and irregular metres seen the same Op. 36? What about the overall structure of the Diabelli Variations (a long series of different perspectives on one idea, which could potentially go on forever--not counting the penultimate section and coda)? Essentially the same fundamental structure as L'art de varier (which deserves a similar stature in the piano repertoire). Possibly the final variation, no. 33, a minuet is a reference to no. 39 in Reicha's set: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks1jAMN7XTw&index=40&list=OL...

Glad that he's finally getting some of recognition that he has been unfairly denied for centuries. There is extraordinary intelligence and personality behind his music. It's almost inexplicable that he doesn't get more attention. By far the most "underrated" composer that I am aware of.

Reicha's work proves that the style pioneered by Haydn was not only fundamentally sound, but capable of change and development far beyond what music scholars would typically have thought to have been possible. Music history, and perhaps world history would be very different if subsequent composers had continued along the path broken by Reicha rather than that taken by "The Romantic Generation".

Definitely the influence worked in both directions. Some comments by Ilić on that topic can be found in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2xC3UDeTYo

Romero's claim that this was intentional stretches credulity.

As a viewer, it's routine to see classical recordings on YouTube claimed as/attributed to/ categorized as the wrong thing. It doesn't help that differences in two different recordings of, say, the same piano piece can be so similar in some respects, so as to trip up automatic systems. "Widespread systematic failure" is probably the best way to describe the current state of affairs.

This issue needs special attention, and classical videos ought to be treated as a special case, IMHO.

Worth noting that the reverse is also possible, i.e. recordings being altered only slightly, being able to fool human listeners into hearing them as being different, see for instance the fraudulent recordings attributed to Joyce Hatto.

This is more or less the establishment view, held by those who shepherded in the current state of affairs.

Will go one further: the use of emoji at all defeats the purpose of having a language and an alphabet.

What's a "pro", anyway? The category of people who use computers for work is a comprehensive one.

This time around, they have way more cash and maintain a larger share of much larger markets, and keep tighter control of spending and resource use. Their decline, if you are right about the writing being on the wall, will be an extremely long and slow one when it begins (we're talking about the first derivative here, right?). Too slow, probably, to reach "moribundity" rather than an equilibrium point of mediocrity.