mathgenius

It's "quantum computing twitter", so mainly experts twittering to each other.

If you're interested, I made a video about these "anyons" [1]. Or, more briefly there's this [2].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0mn7UBonSs

[2] https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/2030/wh...

Relevant tweet thread: https://twitter.com/condensed_the/status/1361018841724256267

> insulate myself from people who can control me and make me feel miserable.

I'd like to know the answer to this aswell. It just may not be possible, not without also insulating from all the good people in the world. My current strategy is to run the other way as fast as I can whenever I find one of these control freaks coming my way. And on the other hand, to glue myself to people that I do work well with. Anyway, solving this riddle is 80% of the "problem", the other 20% is the what/where/when, etc. (IMO.)

Yeah, RH could legitimately be trying to protect their users from what is basically a pump & dump scheme. Alternatively, they could be having liquidity troubles, or backend trouble, etc. If you are serious about trading you should not be on RH...

Of course they are related! A knot is a knot. It's just that mathematicians are obsessed with proving things rigorously [1], whereas the sailor just wants his sails to hang right.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perko_pair

> For example, most of the volume in USDT is faked by the exchanges.

I agree this volume cannot be trusted. Much like the asian volume in 2017 turned out to be mostly fake. I find it hard to believe that Binance got so big so fast.

Kraken has USDT/USD markets. I'm sure there are plenty of other places to trade USDT for USD.

https://www.kraken.com/prices/usdt-tether-usd-price-chart/us...

As long as tether can provide a small percentage of liquidity on USDT/USD then they (arbitrageurs) can maintain the peg. This can obviously break down, and has in the past. It's all about liquidity...

> cannot accept a system that requires blind belief or that has some obvious logical flaws.

There's a lot of religions out there. Many of them are bunk, and many are not much better than the local chess club. But there are some potent practices out there, it's not all about "blind belief". This crisis you describe is precisely the "religious" impulse (or whatever you want to call it). For some people they end up climbing mountains and that does it for them. It's all the same impulse, is what I am trying to say. And you don't have to believe in some kind of santa clause god to get the juice. Good luck!

Correlations are "transmitted" faster than light speed. You could call this information. Quantum information theory is way more complicated (and many open questions) than Shannon information theory.

Given an unknown state, it's not possible to know if the parts are entangled. There is no experiment to determine this. The "facts" of quantum have this weird disconnect with reality.

If you have access to many copies of the same state, then you can do tomography to learn if the state is entangled or not. But this is a different situation to what you are asking in your question. Actually I'm not entirely sure what your question is asking, but I won't delete this comment just yet.

My grade two teacher demonstrated "venn diagrams" one day, it absolutely blew my mind. She had a bunch of coloured shapes scattered on the floor, then put one hoop over the triangles, another hoop over the red shapes, and then, what to do with the red triangles? My six-year-old brain loved it when she put one hoop overlapping the other one. And yet to this day I refuse to memorize the multiplication table.

Rote learning is easier for the teacher: easier to teach, easier to mark. It's not just mathematics, it's all the subjects in school. Many of the "geniuses" merely survive school, nothing more.

> a top-down emphasis on productivity over humanity.

It's not top-down. I think this is a trap that people fall into. We are operating a massive distributed message passing system (the financial-political system) with no top-down authority any more. No one is in charge. We are _all_ King Louis XIV, sitting around waiting for the minions to deliver trinkets. Meanwhile the guillotine is on its way.

Thanks for sharing... Plenty of devs don't like using debuggers. It's just a style thing. We use print instead. (The only time i really need a debugger is when my c code segfaults.) Are you sure you suck at debugging? It is the hardest part of the job. Good devs always write down (to keep the bugs at bay).

Don't worry about learning other languages, much better to be interested in something. Try to find something that interests you.

Common dude, eat better food [1]! Try to get more raw food. I gotta do this too.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9__23-zjhM

I remember a linuxconf from around 2000 or so where they announced cairo. It was pretty exciting stuff, and over the years I have used it for various projects. The latest is this one https://github.com/punkdit/huygens

He should make another language, surely that's a good retirement project? But he must call it "monte".

It all seems very mild what he is saying. Some nice analogies. How did this get the Ant IPO killed? Maybe there is something else going on here...

This is exactly the kind of bs that happens when someone gives away their hard work for free.

I don't know what the solution is, but when you do stuff for free, try to make sure there is a mutual giving of some sort, otherwise disasters like this have a way of creeping up on you.

It's almost as if the scales of Themis need to be rebalanced somehow, with good or with bad, she doesn't care.

Another recent outburst of creativity from him is discussed here:

https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2020/09/new_normed_divi...

I wish I was half as confident as this guy!

Sorry, I think I was referring specifically to the dude that did integer polynomial equations. His name starts with P i think.

It is such a mystery, how consciousness can perceive pattern.

The ancient Greeks did stuff by example, not using algebra. They said stuff like, "take 22 and multiply by 5..." with actual numbers involved, then at the end they say "and that's how it works in general". So it's up to the reader to generalize from the specific. Algebra works in the opposite direction, where the reader is obliged to specify from the generic. I happen to much prefer the ancient Greek way of doing mathematics, but it seems to have fallen out of fashion.

Here's how to analyze the Rubik's cube using GAP [1]. For example, they show that you can get any permutation of the eight vertices of the cube. It's a great way to get motivated to learn some group theory.

[1] https://www.gap-system.org/Doc/Examples/rubik.html

> temporarily sounding smart or experienced

This is real talent. Don't underestimate it. Others can code like a superhero, but sound like a meathead when you talk to them (me often).

I'm very interested, but also skeptical. How do I know this isn't just fashion ? I would be more convinced if this was backed up by scientific studies, or even just showed examples more than a few years old. What were they doing in the 1960's ? People have done studies showing that fonts with serif's increase comprehension (at least in printed form) of words. Have similar studies been done with colours? Otherwise this article could be complete bs written by someone with a fetish for pastels. Five years from now this same person could be writing about how colours need to have more zing, and reversing all these "not ideal / better" diagrams. Remember when webdesigners went crazy using low-contrast fonts that were barely readable ?

It helps if you get interested before putting the effort in.... Check out this breezy youtube from superstar Tai-Danae Bradley:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiadG3ywJIs

Yes, they are pretty much the same thing. There are some particular quantum-y elements though, such as the cup & cap. In general relativity these would (i think?) correspond to index raising and lowering operators.

Yes, very closely related. ZX is a specific set of tensors within this diagrammatic framework.

Apparently there is an actual experiment on six-year-olds taking place [1,2]:

"Experiment. Consider ten children of ages between six and ten and consider ten high-school teachers of physics and mathematics. The high-school teachers of physics and mathematics will have all the time they require to refresh their quantum mechanics background, and also to update it with regard to recent developments in quantum information. The children on the other hand will have quantum theory explained in terms of the graphical formalism. Both teams will be given a certain set of questions, for the children formulated in diagrammatic language, and for the teachers in the usual quantum mechanical formalism. Whoever solves the most problems and solves them in the fastest time wins. If the diagrammatic language is much more intuitive, it should in principle be possible for the children to win."

[1] https://twitter.com/coecke/status/1285531026270367744 [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1787

You might like to check out Terry Rudolph's book, "Q is for quantum".