tim-kt

But this defeats the point of having open access and usually a DOI points to a journal. Why have a journal that reviews journal articles?

I'm in math, so I can't give you an answer on tech journals unfortunately. And for math, I don't really read any specific journal. It's so much work to read and get something out of a research paper in math that I pretty much only read papers that are directly related to my work or have been recommended to me.

This reminded me of the fact that one colleague of mine even updates the arXiv version if any errors are spotted and says himself that this makes the arXiv version better than the journal version.

If you know the authors of your specific area of research, arXiv is a nice way to read their new papers when they are (mostly) done but the submission to a journal is not finished yet.

Still, technically correct.

Technically, the slogan says "Lick balls Merz" (any balls are fine).

But this is addressed in the first sentence?

[...] right-clicking an image while some text on the page is highlighted (to show as many buttons as possible) looks like so

Motorola was subsequently sold to Lenovo in 2014.

https://news.lenovo.com/pressroom/press-releases/lenovo-comp...

I agree. I would say that I am addicted to caffeine. I definitely get withdrawal symptoms if I don't have a coffee. But since it is so accessible and there are no health risks, it does not affect me negatively to "feed" the addiction.

Do you have some practical tips to reduce exposure to unwanted thoughts (except for, maybe, the obvious such as making sure that people/things do not interrupt you while you work by turning off notifications and closing the door)?

although largely because the point isn't being made precisely

I agree. I wasn't really trying to make a point. But yes, what I am implying is that posts that you can immediately recognize as AI are low effort posts, which are not worth my time.

My comment was not really meant as a criticism (of AI) but more of an agreement that I am also confident in the fact that the post is AI-generated (while the parent comment does not seem to be so confident).

But to add a personal comment or criticism, I don't like this style of writing. If you like prompt your AI to write in a better style which is easier on the eyes (and it works) then please, go ahead.

To me this kind of use of AI (generating the whole article) is equivalent to a low-effort post. I also personally don't like this kind of writing, regardless of whether or not an AI generated it.

It does for me too. Especially the short parts with headings, the bold sentences in their own paragraph and especially formulations like "X isn't just... it's Y".

Personally, I just don't like the way this is written. As I said though, I am not an expert and so I may be outside the target group. I think that the original "this is AI" comment is an automatic response which alternatively carries the meaning "this is low-effort" and in that sense I still think that it is valid criticism.

While I agree that it's not important whether or not someone uses AI to improve a blog post or create code examples, this blog post seems like the output of the prompt "Write an interesting blog post about a goroutine leak". I don't have the expertise to verify if what is written is actually correct or makes sense, but based on the other comments there seems to be some confusion if what is written is actually content or also AI generated output.

This seems like an interesting problem and an interesting fix, but there is so much code and so little explanation that I am lost after "The Code That Looked Perfectly Fine". It also reads very much like AI. And FYI the "output" code blocks are (at least for me on Firefox) a dark gray on a darker gray background, so very unreadable.

You can still optimize for the expectation value, which is also essentially poker strategy.

I saw the mirrored interactive Human simulator and decided to just post this exact Show HN:

https://news.ysimulator.run/item/2297

I don't know how to use WordPress, so I accidentally published this as a standalone site. I'm killing the submitted link and the actual blog post now lives here: https://timktitarev.wordpress.com/2025/10/11/continuous-petr...

The last time I tried Immich (a year ago or so), my impression was that Immich tries to imitate Google Photos as much as possible. This includes features such as searching by a person or by "cat", which requires some machine learning sophistication, which is done locally (you can also disable these features). This would be my guess, but I'm not entirely sure.

vimtutor is to Babbel what this is to duolingo

It took me half a minute to realize that you probably meant "vimtutor is to VIM master what Babbel is to duolingo".

Meaning the first best language depends on the job?

A safe community isn’t one where people are held in check by police. People are not roving around thinking “oh I’d break and enter and murder and rape but for the fact a police officer might shoot me.”

That's also not necessarily the point I'm making. Suppose you are in a society where a small part of people are bad actors, for whatever reason. They will break and enter, murder, and rape. You want to protect the rest of the society against these bad actors. You can now equip everyone with weapons so they may defend themselves. That also enables the bad actors to use said weapons because we don't know who really know who is a bad actor (at least not the ones that didn't commit any crimes yet). Or you give weapons only to a small part of society, where you enforce strict gun laws.

The alternative is to reduce the number of bad actors and this is, in part, fulfilled by the conditions that you are describing. But how do I reduce the number of state leaders that are willing to shoot each other? I guess it's what you are saying, namely constructive, open, and fair trade. But we're not really making progress in that direction it seems.

It's an interesting analogy. I'm opposed to guns in every household because we have the police which is meant to give security to people. There, we allow gun use, but under stricter conditions. The majority agrees that this is right, so the system works.

What is "the police" on the level of countries? There is no majority that agrees that, e. g., the NATO can serve as the police. It feels like on this level, we live in an anarchy with only very few actors who don't really want to live together. So maybe nukes are an option, although I don't like it.

Sure, thanks. I also saw this sentence, which was not there in the last version (I think):

That is to say, with n nodes, gaussian integration will approximate your function's integral with a higher order polynomial than a basic technique would - resulting in more accuracy.

This is not really the case, Gaussian integration is still just interpolation on n nodes, but the way of choosing the nodes increases the integration's exactness degree to 2n-1. It's actually more interesting that Gaussian integration does not require any more work in terms of interpolation, but we just choose our nodes better. (Actually, computing the nodes is sometimes more work, but we can do that once and use them forever.)

[...] almost all methods of numerical integration (in any case all those that are useful and I am aware of) are equivalent to approximating the target function with another simpler function, which is then integrated using an exact formula.

The key property of quadrature formulas (i.e. numerical integration formulas) is the degree of exactness, which just says up to which degree we can integrate polynomials exactly. The (convergence of the) error of the quadrature depends on this exactness degree.

If you approximate the integral using a sum of n+1 weights and function evaluations, then any quadrature that has exactness degree n or better is in fact an interpolatory quadrature, that is, it is equivalent to interpolating your function on the n+1 nodes and integrating the polynomial. You can check this by (exactly) integrating the Lagrange basis polynomials, through which you can express the interpolation polynomial.

What about it?

No, the integral cannot be "expressed" as a sum over weights and function evaluations (with a "="), it can be approximated with this idea. If you fix any n+1 nodes, interpolate your function, and integrate your polynomial, you will get this sum where the weights are integrals over (Lagrange) basis polynomials. By construction, you can compute the integral of polynomials up to degree n exactly. Now, if you choose the nodes in a particular way (namely, as the zeros of some polynomials), you can increase this to up to 2n+1. What I'm getting at is that the Gaussian integration is not estimating the integrals of polynomials of degree 2n+1, but it's evaluating them exactly.

What exactly is the mathematical model? What are the mathematics involved? I couldn't find it on your blog.