This map has areas of london by square foot for a closer comparison, but isn't by tube stops. Looks like we are more expensive than the bay area, if you go by area - We live in much smaller houses than in America, I believe
I've lived in both recently, and London definitely wins for more the more decrepit Victorian stock, but SF is no stranger to the flat conversion phenomenon and I'd say the average living space in the city is not much bigger than London.
However what tips the scales for London being more affordable IMHO is the fact that there is not 500 square miles of water smack in the middle spreading everything out. For instance in London I lived 9 tube stops from the center and it was < 5 miles by bicycle. In the Bay Area I also live 9 BART stops from downtown SF but it is 15 miles, I can't cycle (because no bike path over the bay bridge), and I get less for my money relative to London. Throw on the anemic transit here, and London is much more doable on a budget.
True although that's changing. London salaries outside The City used to seem to top out around £60k, but in recent years that ceiling has been broken. Meanwhile, Google and Facebook still pay ridiculous salaries, but smaller companies can't afford that, and with funding slowing down it's going to lead to even more belt tightening. You might be surprised how many people in tech are working for $50k, $60k, $70k in SF these days.
If you know the term 'argument' sure. Your mind thinks "ok.. args.. x ..variable, so this could be variable in the categorical sense or cardinal sense". Curl? Really? When I first saw that after 10 years of wget'ing (yeah I've been at this a while), I had no intuition what it was until I saw the arguments being passed. My first thought was literally "like the weird Olympics sport with brushes on ice?" It took me half a minute to realize it had to do with URLs (and I still don't know what the 'c' means - though I'm sure GNUinfo or a man page would easily answer that).
Print is semi intuitive, but it could mean so many things. Print in awk vs print in tcsh might have entirely different behavior. Is there a \n appended? How do you delimit it? It might give you a vague idea, but you're still going to have to go to your informational resource of choice in order to figure out: a) the parameters to pass to it, b) the output formatting/delimiters/implicit \r or \n's, etc. (e.g. Hell, in Python 2 you add a comma to prevent a new-line - I'm not even sure that syntax was influenced from (though logically I can understand the comma-suffix implies additional components and thus you want to suppress any line-break), I'd be hard-pressed to the etymology of that).
Brings me right back to the 'functor' issue. But hey, at least a ML functor is entirely different from C++. They overloaded the term (like delta or mu might be overloaded in math) but at least I don't have the risk of using it and getting 'partially consistent' behavior. (For example, having print exhibit the same properties as bash would plus a side-cases added by the author as 'feature enhancements' which work great for him, but if his side-project gains traction will just lead to more ambiguity.)
> It took me half a minute to realize it had to do with URLs
Oh! "curl" is "c url". It's taken me several years to understand that, and I knew exactly what it did! I imagined my data "curling" off the website, down the intertubes to my filesystem.
more than that, i remember reading it was pronounced "see url" .. which makes sense when you look at its default behaviour of printing whatever's at the url you give it; especially compared to wget, which 'gets' whatever's at a url
There are two delta functions commonly used in mathematics, the Dirac Delta function, and Kronecker's delta. One is a discrete function, the other is continuous.
Kronecker, a mathematician who was obsessed with the finite, who tried to destroy Cantor's Set Theory, and to some extent, Cantor himself, is unsurprisingly the one associated with the discrete version.
Dirac, a physicist, used in in his book on Quantum Mechanics, and finds lots of use in Physics. Unsurprisingly, it's going to be the continuous version of the thing.
In mathematics, the history of ideas is caught up in the function of the ideas. Sometimes, to understand something, the easiest way is to look back at the problems that resulted in the development of the idea. In times before source control and git blame, it's actually quite helpful to attach the inventor's name to the concept. This is not, of course, the primary reason for the attachment (and many times, the history is more complicated and interesting), but it doesn't mean that it isn't useful.
"""
The University of Manchester's Small-Scale Experimental Machine (SSEM)[15] is generally recognized as world's first electronic computer that ran a stored program—an event that occurred on 21 June 1948.[16][17] However the SSEM was not regarded as a full-fledged computer, but more a proof of concept predecessor to the Manchester Mark 1 computer, which was first put to research work in April 1949. On 6 May 1949 the EDSAC in Cambridge ran its first program, making it arguably "the first complete and fully operational regular electronic digital stored-program computer".[18] It is sometimes claimed that the IBM SSEC, operational in January 1948, was the first stored-program computer;[19] this claim is controversial, not least because of the hierarchical memory system of the SSEC, and because some aspects of its operations, like access to relays or tape drives, were determined by plugging.[20]
"""
As well as the glitches, there's a story that the tilt was initially set to entirely cancel the lateral acceleration from the curve. The press on the demo train was well lubricated with free booze -- result: headlines about the new train making them sick.
