jpendry

you realize you're saying you wouldn't choose the guy that _invented_ semaphores right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_(programming)

and _that_ is why you are so good

they pulled those tricks because widows and orphans money was regulated so it had to be in 'AAA' products, and the widows and orphans demanded higher returns because 'everybody' else was getting higher returns or they were going to invest they're money elsewhere.

look, by no means am i blaming 'widows and orphans' for this mess, it's just the reasons for it are very complex. even regulation that seems like a great idea, grading investment products, ended up playing some small part in the chaos.

for what it's worth, i've been using http://www.lala.com/ more and more, and have come to really enjoy it.

the link was really good, thank you.

as to this being on HN, i thought i'd just throw it at the wall and see if it stuck. in some manner, it is still an escape from the knee jerk masses because it takes the currently under-reported side of cramer, but i take your point that it's not dealing with these: http://www.scheme.com/tspl3/further.html#./further:h3

fair enough, i didn't word that well. what i was trying to convey was simply that he was holding conversations with computer scientists, biologists, and physicists each in their respective languages, which to me is pretty impressive.

wow. this article is horribly biased.

i went to a lecture wolfram gave at my university when he was touring for NKS. he would answer a question from a CS professor until he went over the CS professor's head, then a biologist until he went over his head, then a physicist until he went over her head. flippantly passing off that level of genius by calling him "the lovable George Costanza of the mathematics community" says something. i understand wolfram has a huge ego, but that does not belittle his accomplishments.

just because your work "ruffled some feathers in the scientific community" currently, does not mean that it won't be considered ground breaking in 100 years. to be clear, i'm referring to how scientists become attached to their life's work and thus biased, as opposed to anything specific to wolfram or NKS and cellular automata.

finally, Alpha will be judged when it comes out. if it's worthwhile great, if not fine, but there's not much point in trying to persuade people of something before it is out.

awsome.

I agree it would be nice to see new items, but I would be afraid of losing the simplicity of the design for the feature.

Was Socrates bound by an obligation to Society to teach Plato a vocation? It appears to me there are a lot of similarities between this situation and that one (ignoring the fact that this guy probably isn't Socrates, and that arresting is slightly different than executing).

this ties in beautifully with yegge's recent post about marketing