Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | throway88989898's commentslogin

"These notebooks are just Python code. They even have #-comments instead of markdown. For awesome Python notebooks, see

http://norvig.com/ipython/README.html "

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12470109


You can already reopen PDFs where you left them in Adobe Reader :

Edit > Accessibility > Setup Assistant > Set all accessibility options > Next > Next > Next > Next > Reopen documents to the last viewed page

or

Edit > Preferences > Documents > Restore last view settings when reopening documents


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huBskeb-syk


"Humans who are not concentrating are not general intelligences": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19251755


For me it hangs on IDA*

otherwise mighty well done!

Ideas to add:

- a short description of the algorithm

- zoom out

+ knight tour


It's not hanging, it just takes a bit before it gets going. I had to wait about 30 seconds before the IDA* visualization started running.


Also thought IDA* hanged. An indicator indicating initialization would be helpful (didn't see one).


Indicators that indicate are of the best kind.

Joke aside: kudos on turning a perceived frustration into a feature fix. I wouldn't have thought about that.


Look, I was merely trying to give the author more information by verifying your observation. Your remark to me seems reasonable only if the author can see how many upvotes/downvotes a certain comment has. I don't know if he can.


That one isn't filled with unfiltered optimism :P

But yes


Neatly phrased:

Trends which appear in slices of data may disappear or reverse when the groups are combined.


Or perhaps even more succinctly: slicing data can introduce bias.


This is less accurate, because not slicing data can also lead to bias.


Except the original statement didn't make any claim about "not slicing", so neither does mine.


Not slicing is nevertheless slicing. The trivial selection. Rush's song "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice"


Convoluted explanation only to cite the epic wikipedia gif

Fouri-ous there's no mention of Fourier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolution_theorem


I think they meant it's inconsistent with the 'memory value recorded vs memory address value' distinction in a Turing machine (as in, it's not consistent with its physical instantiation: "the real world"), not inconsistent with axioms of formal logic. I'm getting confused because I think these are two or more different research camps (computability, philosophy, logic, etc) and I don't know how much jargon is shared.

OP's other post's comment is related https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19265632


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_impossibility

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_theory#Objections_to_set_t...


Precisely. The point is that ALL operators do actual, physical work.

Work == Energy. Energy == Proof-of-work.

If X is an infinite-byte object then comparing it to itself should take infinite time, whereas determining its identity is O(1)


Also, I didn't start with set theory to get here. I started with Type theory as foundational.


It's outside my knowledge space. What are the implications to computability or mathematics?


The law of identity is a blunder. It's the Principle of explosion in disguise.

If one x = x can be trivial to determine But another x = x is infinitely complex then in one single law you have a triviality and infinity.

That's the principle of explosion !


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: