HN user

pinerd3

34 karma
Posts0
Comments17
View on HN
No posts found.

I think they basically agree with your point here -- they mention Descartes and Kant to say roughly "I hold basically these ideas, but I don't mention the philosophers' names when I talk about them because 1) I came to them independently, and 2) the people I'm talking to are not familiar with the context so situating our conversation there isn't helpful." Their argument is that you can have philosophical conversations without relying on the context of the canon, and that in a first-level discussion they wouldn't bring up Descartes or Kant.

Strongly disagree with this:

I think the variety in barista coffee is different from the variety in, say, fashion or wine because with fashion and wine there is social signalling and all kinds of things going on

Sounds like OP just doesn't care about coffee thst much. Fine for them, but any subject has a subculture; there are definitely social signaling games within the coffee world

Can you recommend any command-line pdf tools? As a student I have to look at lots of pdfs and the gui tools for manipulation are very lacking.

I agree that a smart, ambitious person can become expert in more than one field in their life — but jumping to a new area of mathematics is on an entirely lower level than jumping from algorithmic finance to cutting edge biomedical, especially at the time Erdős was working.

Oh, also, two other things: First, CuriosityStream has a bundle deal with Nebula where you can get both at once: [1]. You have to find an appropriate promo link from one of the participating YouTubers but that shouldn't be too hard.

Second, I know you mentioned wanting to find dedicated services, but if you're spending a decent amount of time on YouTube and you can afford it, I find Youtube Premium well worth it. Not having ads makes such a huge difference to the experience, and it also pays creators better!

[1] https://help.curiositystream.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034158...

This is a reasonable argument, but it implies that FORTRAN is in fact not a good language for beginners; almost all beginners care about IO / text processing, and almost none care about linear algebra. (Especially if one is talking about beginners-in-general, as opposed to engineering types who are learning to use programming as a tool.)

This is clever, but I wouldn't call it a variation on this style of proof — the OP was an example of a somewhat-subtle logic error, while this is just two instances of wordplay (forelegs ⇔ four legs; six legs being an 'odd' number of legs for a horse).

The joke is funny though