HN user

tribe

73 karma
Posts20
Comments39
View on HN

When this proof has been presented to me in the past, I believe we assume that m is a positive integer. This is mentioned in one of the comments, but I agree that it should be more clear in statement of the theorem.

Unfortunately, I don't live near UCLA (Does anyone know of a similar program in the Boston area?).

However, I have found that it is not too hard to learn advanced math without the help of an instructor. A couple math-inclined co-workers and I have been reading Topology by Munkres. Since it is such a popular textbook, there are plenty of solutions to exercises online. Working with other people makes it easier to ask questions if you are confused, and also helps me stay motivated.

From the article:

“We discovered the tile using using a computer to exhaustively search through a large but finite set of possibilities,” said Casey. “We were of course very excited and a bit surprised to find the new type of pentagon.

I would expect it to take longer than seconds, since there are many ways that these shapes can fit together, and there are many possible edge lengths.

I have read similar perspectives before[1], and I am not sure how I feel about them. On the one hand, much of the industrial pollution /is/ in response to consumer demand and reducing personal consumption has some impact on that. But on the other hand, it seems very clear that by and large the public will never change consumption patterns to be more environmentally friendly ( sometimes because they cannot financially, and often because they do not care ). So it seems systematic changes are necessary.

[1] https://orionmagazine.org/article/forget-shorter-showers/

I know it is computationally a bit of a pain, but if you have points v_1,v_2,v_3 does the Jordan Canonical Form of the matrix [v_1 v_2 v_3] not satisfy your requirements? I believe that the original matrix is similar to both its permutations and rotations, so the JCF should be invariant. My linear algebra is a bit rusty, so I might be wrong

There are quite a few decent mobile apps for reading HN. I use HN reader on Android, which has a few problems, but I actually like better than the website in some ways. For example, I can collapse comment trees.

FTA:

Is your data scientist producing analytics for machines or humans?

This is a really interesting question that I had not considered before. I think it is an important one not only for those hiring, but also for applicants to ask during an interview in order to determine if the position is a good fit.

In fact, this is fairly common in Hindustani music. Many ragas have different versions of the same note depending on how you approach it and switching between ragas often requires re-tuning

Well there was some mention.

We can probably add software to that list: early software engineering work found that, dismayingly, bug rates seem to be simply a function of lines of code, and one would expect diseconomies of scale. So one would expect that in going from the ~4,000 lines of code of the Microsoft DOS operating system kernel to the ~50,000,000 lines of code in Windows Server 2003 (with full systems of applications and libraries being even larger: the comprehensive Debian repository in 2007 contained ~323,551,126 lines of code) that the number of active bugs at any time would be… fairly large. This lead to predictions of doom and spurred much research into automated proof-checking, static analysis, and functional languages

Of course, you need to be pretty confident in your proof-checker. If we aren't totally sure about machine-proof methods, then we comback to the "Doomsday hypothesis" at the end of the article, where many results are invalidated at once.