plafl

Exactly. Testability requires modularity and reproducibility.

And done: https://plopezadeva.com/helisim.html

Every time I see something like this I think I should open source my masters thesis in aerospace engineering. It was an helicopter simulator implemented in (ancient, numarray) python. At least it could be an starting point for someone else although it's written in spanish (damn!). I think that the flight dynamics are much better than anything else I have seen on the wild. It had an interface with FlightGear. I just have written a friend of mine that teaches at my university to ask about copyright...

And they will cannibalize your profits, up to 60%, if you start to make significant money. And they can kick you out anytime they want. It's all in the terms and conditions.

There is a graph of sectors when at least one founder is female but there is no equivalent data for all male founders so I cannot compare

We must be detached to think clearly but we must care to do something. So it's either we act foolhardy or we do nothing.

I love this quote: "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses". Bjarne Stroustrup.

Well, in Julia you can use good old goto :)

  using Combinatorics
  
  # Initialization
  numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
  primes = [3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17]
  winners = []
  
  # Loop though the permutations, collecting only prime pairs
  for p in permutations(numbers)
      for i in 2:9
          if !(p[i-1] + p[i] in primes)
              @goto nextpermutation
          end
      end
      push!(winners, p)
      @label nextpermutation
  end
  

If I were to use a non-brute force approach I would consider computing all the hamiltonian paths of a graph where each vertex is a number and two vertices are connected only if their sum is a prime number

Europe is a collection of small countries. It's not coincidence that the economic powerhouse of Europe, Germany, is the most populated country. And since this is going quite off topic here is some wild idea: let's keep just a fraction of the current universities, like say 5 or 10%, force talent in Europe to concentrate in a few places, force mixing across nations. Actually this is already encouraged somehow but let's be more brutal. Just thinking out loud maybe an stupid idea.

So you need to make a new language similar enough to preexisting ones but on the other hand it should give you noticeable more power to justify the change. It's a very hard to solve problem.

Well, thank you. Actually it's possible to follow even for someone without CS education like me. I have skimmed over it and actually it seems that although they are confident that the string rewriting system is equivalent to the conjecture it has not been proven yet. Anyway it's very interesting, I will try to read it in depth.

I'm glad is in the front page. I own the first version and I'm quite happy and use it massively. I use it to read and annotate papers and technical books. This is for me what keeps it from perfection:

- Bigger screen would be great for my use case

- Software. As have been said repeatedly here the tablet is open. This is true in the sense that in order to comply with the GPL3 it's very easy to SSH to the tablet which runs Linux. This is awesome. However I think a little more support to developers would be great in the form of documentation instead of reverse engineering. Lot's of people think of ways of improving the software and this would make it much easier and better for end users (for example better file transfer, more file formats... in a reliable way)

Edit: formatting

I think the art is moved from the proof itself to translating the proof to computer language.

Edit: typo

I had to search the original publication to see what kind of computer cluster they used. Here it is in case you are curious:

"We ran all three experiments simultaneously on 20 nodes on the Lonestar5 cluster and computing on 24 CPUs per node in parallel."

It seems it took less than an hour. I think that calling it a "fleet of computers" is a little too much. It makes it look like they brute-forced the problem while the truth is that as usually the merit was on the algorithm.

I don't share your pessimism.

If you think a shorter elegant proof is more desirable, well, I totally agree with you. I think math is more about the proofs than the results. On the other hand I have zero problems trusting a proof checked by a computer. I don't know you but I usually trust much more computers with tedious computations than myself.

Both him and the other "millionaire" are book authors. It makes sense: on one hand you increase awareness and recognition of yourself and on the other you get to know what are common questions and doubts of your potential readers and how to explain things better.

I don't think most people blame USA, it's just "progress". Yesterday at the supermarket I noticed the disproportionate ratio between healthy food (and I count there red meat) and junk food (snacks, sweets,...)

It certainly looks fabricated. Even if they were transported in open wagons only the front of the train feels all the power of the wind.

Is reading enough to understand the real world without direct experience of the real world? Is there any research that tries to answer this question?

> This is why I'm convinced places that use proprietary tech are going to fail in the future since the natural forces of competition will cause the internal technology to stagnate.

I doubt proprietary tech is going to fade completely, but it's true that maybe there are forces that are pushing for big companies to make more and more projects open source. If you think about it it makes sense: the employees are happier because their work has more impact, they also benefit because they can showcase it in their CV. For the company they externalize testing, quality improves because employees are going to be more careful when their code is in the open and they are more motivated. It can also make hiring easier.

Thank you for the explanation. I cannot count how many times I have wished for something similar in python.

I doubt you can make a joke about blowing an airport on any country regardless of your religion and don't expect a visit of the police. It's a very clear exception to freedom of speech.

Physicist help needed: From my near null knowledge of quantum mechanics it seems they decrease randomness in phase and amplitude measurement by increasing uncertainty in mirrors position. So, this is interesting because the mirrors are macroscopic objects that interacted with the light in a rather simple way and conditions. On the other hand... Don't they require the mirror position in a well determined position to measure the gravitational waves?

I don't know why but I was not expecting such an old book to be so richly illustrated and with such a nice typography. Explanations look very clear too.

The IQ thing blew my mind, although to be honest "low IQ" is not correct since average policemen IQ is slightly above average. Suddenly I'm reminded of Brave New World.

The same first impression for me. It's great people with more faith than me have pushed forward and actually I'm still waiting to make the jump. It was very similar with python for scientific computing in the beginning. When I wrote my master thesis in python in 2006 python was completely dwarfed by Matlab. I was more enthusiastic on those days trying new things and also had more time. It is yet to be seen if Julia displaces python but at least it has non zero chance of doing it.

A curious way of thinking. I would say insurance is exactly the opposite of gambling.

An analysis of sewer water has detected the virus as early as 15th of January in Barcelona. See for example (in Spanish) https://www.lavanguardia.com/local/barcelona/20200607/481654...

For the uninitiated like me it's confusing at first the following sentence when deriving the Nash equilibrum:

"If first player has a K, because of 1. and 2., he would only lose if he bets. So first player should pass if he has a K."

It actually means that the first player always loses on average if he bets (expected utility -1/2 if not mistaken). If he folds however the expected utility is clearly zero since half of the time wins and half of the time loses.

I have not reached yet the description of the algorithm.

I actually find somewhat paradoxical that the first player should fold with a K and bluff with a Q! I remember that I loved little results like this when years ago I first followed the game theory course in Coursera. It was a little dry but I completed it nevertheless since I found it quite fascinating. I do wonder what possible applications are for my working field, machine learning, to apply these kind of algorithms. I would love to have an excuse to devote some time to it.

Class size impacts at all levels up to college. I think teachers will be the first to acknowledge that they enjoy classes with a a dozen or less students.