Vast sprawling suburban wastelands with no services is not the solution. Just build houses is easily said but it’s not necessarily where people want to live.
I don’t want cities to build stupid EV charging crap everywhere. They could invest that in public transport instead. EVs have all the same social problems as cars.
Use a programming that is decoupled from stateful manipulations and control flow?
Programming does not need to involve itself with the hardware, that’s just a tool for evaluation. A program is an idea expressed in a language. It’s some formal statement of intent. Sometimes we can evaluate it to produce an output. Sometimes these statements are muddied by underlying representations.
The length of a declarative program seems a pretty good rough measure of complexity in the way you are talking about. Operational complexity of course, in the number of steps to actually evaluate it is a bit different, based on what you are using.
Why are there so many water from x devices from MIT. Water from air, water from salt water etc. Is this all they do lol? Is there a group of people responsible?
The whole point of Algebraic Geometry is to describe geometry using algebra. It’s is a very deep, successful and important subject in modern mathematics. I wouldn’t say it needs to recover it’s geometric routes, it’s sort of the whole point. To describe something geometric you actually just need to describe algebras of functions on that object. It’s a very rich subject.
What happens at school and early uni however is a different story. Classical algebraic geometry could definitely be taught to undergrads or high schoolers but there is some weird insistence on only calculus being important. If anything the categorical and algebraic ideas expressed in lots of algebraic geometry follow through into all sorts of other areas of mathematics. I think there are even connections to modern physics. Id say it’s probably one of the more important areas, but it’s relegated to later stages.
Why does it have to be so siloed? What if I want documents with a slight bit of inactivity? Why must I go through two different protocols? What if I want to read a paper next to the Juyter notebook that made it? I think it should be the clients job to take whatever slice of a richer universe it wants. This also stops duplication of effort, why maintain separate protocols and clients etc. It’s just a search issue, there are plenty of text websites out there. Protocols like Gemini I think are a waste of time.
I disagree on it being the OS maintainers job, for the reason of duplication of effort. Packaging every single package or library individually for every distro is a colossal waste of person power. But I agree that there should be a security review.
Yes I would say most of physics we currently can make predictions with are just effective models that are only applicable at some certain scale. Certainly there may be some underlying ideas that get shared around but doing calculations and making predictions is effective.
Basically approximating a solution, and then finding an equation from some data. Nothing wrong with writing down an approximation to some problem. An approximation can be very useful. As long as you know it’s limitations it’s fine to answer questions where it applies. But this can not replace deeper understanding. It’s all good to write down approximate solutions to some hard n body problem or non linear pde, just don’t look too far ahead in time, or update your model with fresh data if you need to.
For b) most people do not read a paper linearly, you look at maybe the intro, skim around a bit, and then maybe go to an appropriate section. If you are really invested then maybe you go through the whole thing. A graph would be a much better format. A bespoke expert with time pressure is not going to comb over the whole thing, they will pick out the bits they care about.
Dynamic typing failures come up in math too. People love to ignore precisely where functions are defined, and then try to dynamically extend it elsewhere and are surprised when it spits out nonsense. Another example, saying a function has a non isolated singularity. It’s more like a codimension something region where you fail to glue together and get a coherent result.
Basically the article is just lazy evaluation like in Haskell working with infinite lists. Numbers like Pi, e, sqrt(2) are the programs that generate them. However we use syntactic sugar, or just a compact notation, to represent that program or algorithm. It’s useful to be able to glue all these calculations together, a bit like lazy evaluation, or working with generators. Some programs we have some guarantee, we can probe to arbitrary depths and will have a consistent result, eg Pi. However in general for two random real numbers it’s undecidable if they are even equivalent.
Megacorp scraping the entire internet vs individuals sharing knowledge on a platform are a completely different scale.