Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401
Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
2017-04-23, 1:42 AM #1481
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
One thing I noticed from those recordings is that Knuth only makes eye contact about 10% of the time. I guess he's pretty well re-purposed his visual and spatial faculties for abstract stuff and doesn't like those neural circuits to be thrown off by facial cues.

Joke: How do you find the extroverted mathematician from the group?

S/he will be looking at the other person's shoes.


Yeah, he came across like a person mainly concerned with his own thoughts.

Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
You will do basic category theory anyway if you go far enough in algebra if only as a convenient generalized language to describe what is already clear from the concrete example from algebra.

As for programming, you don't need to know too much about linear logic to take advantage of Rust's memory model, or know category theory to use ML's type system, or know a ton of logic to use prolog. But you probably won't be using math to come up with new such things if math isn't on your radar when you try to invent new **** in software from scratch, although to be fair most of that stuff was already done by the late 70s.

If you want a job at valve and appreciate what they do, a simple guess says that you should probably learn how to program using linear algebra and computer graphics before expecting topology to pay off. Also, knowing probability, calculus, and combinatorics also is helpful pretty much in anything anywhere in life no matter what.


I've seen some category theory, which is why I'm skeptical of it. As far as computer graphics, I've written some primitive 3D stuff, after a bit of linear algebra it's not hard to write code for 3D engines. Poorly optimized code, but it's conceptually not too difficult.
2017-04-23, 1:43 AM #1482
Ok, here's a non sequitur...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/opinion/sunday/is-it-time-to-break-up-google.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-top-region®ion=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region


Quote:
I’m under no delusion that, with libertarian tech moguls like Peter Thiel in President Trump’s inner circle, antitrust regulation of the internet monopolies will be a priority. Ultimately we may have to wait four years, at which time the monopolies will be so dominant that the only remedy will be to break them up. Force Google to sell DoubleClick. Force Facebook to sell WhatsApp and Instagram.


It would be nice! The likelihood that Democrats will run on breaking up large tech companies in 2020 is literally about as great as the likelihood that Donald Trump will have a great record on climate change.
former entrepreneur
2017-04-23, 2:42 AM #1483
Yeah, short of a grander economic crisis, it's a pipe dream to think anything will happen to Google.
2017-04-23, 7:34 AM #1484
Originally posted by Reid:
Yeah, short of a grander economic crisis, it's a pipe dream to think anything will happen to Google.


Nothing will ever happen to Google short of the United States ceasing to exist.

https://googletransparencyproject.org/articles/googles-revolving-door-us
2017-04-23, 8:25 AM #1485
Originally posted by Krokodile:
Oh man, I can't handle those big books full of words. I hope there's something like a booklet conveying most of this stuff in pictures.


Dammit, the only reason he didn't do it is because I said he would! He knows what book I'm talking about! JAAAHHHHHHNNNNN!
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-23, 11:15 AM #1486
Originally posted by Reid:
I've seen some category theory, which is why I'm skeptical of it.


Category theory is just a language to describe very general relationships. Be skeptical of premature or misguided emphasis on expressing this generality, but algebraists and topologists use the language of category theory all the time to save ink and avoid writing proofs peculiar to the concrete setting they happen to be in.

You can also use it to express intuitive conceptual relationships, and also to throw out a bunch of low level set theory boilerplate. In other words, it is a modern foundation for mathematical reasoning.
2017-04-23, 11:22 AM #1487
Hey, look what hit HN this morning

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/04/20/want-to-rescue-rural-america-bust-monopolies/?utm_term=.a84f2839cd62
2017-04-23, 11:29 AM #1488
TL;DR: category is most useful when you use it for what it was invented for

https://mathoverflow.net/a/2284
2017-04-23, 11:33 AM #1489
It always feels kind of funny for me when I go back and forth between Jon`C's comments and reading through some of the Ayn Rand chaff on HN (in general, haven't read through the comments on this one) spreading FUD about stuff that questions their convenient entrepreneur morality.
2017-04-23, 11:35 AM #1490
I only glanced at it, but it looks like the top comment on the HN thread for that story is a No True Scotsman defense of 'free markets'.
2017-04-23, 11:36 AM #1491
They're blaming regulation too.
2017-04-23, 11:42 AM #1492
Tech startups basically fall into three camps:

- Capital manufacturing (99.999%)

- Criminal enterprise (Uber, AirBnB)

- Actual company that aims to make **** and has to literally sue to gain the right to compete against incumbents (Tesla, SpaceX)
2017-04-23, 11:43 AM #1493
"It's illegal to sell cars that aren't made by Ford" - Texas
2017-04-23, 12:04 PM #1494
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Category theory is just a language to describe very general relationships. Be skeptical of premature or misguided emphasis on expressing this generality, but algebraists and topologists use the language of category theory all the time to save ink and avoid writing proofs peculiar to the concrete setting they happen to be in.

You can also use it to express intuitive conceptual relationships, and also to throw out a bunch of low level set theory boilerplate. In other words, it is a modern foundation for mathematical reasoning.


Well, it's generally of no help to analysts, and as far as I can tell, like you said, it's a good language, it gives you convenient ways to produce functions and/or objects in a category. I used hom and tensor functors a few times in the algebra course I just took (I'm attempting the qual this summer). But I've also been talking more with Baez, who does this stuff regularly, i.e. he's been doing stuff in applying categories to control theory and chemical processes, however it doesn't seem to be doing much? As in, it's a really cool universal language, but I don't think people in control theory or chemical engineering have a reason to care? So more what I mean is, I think I'm going to avoid that sort of category theory in itself, but seeing as I'm slowly getting shoehorned into the algebraist's way of life I'll have to know it.
2017-04-23, 12:08 PM #1495


Yeah, it's not a bad comparison to compare American corporate structure to an economic tumor. It's sucking the life out of the real economy and is going to kill it.
2017-04-23, 12:09 PM #1496
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
TL;DR: category is most useful when you use it for what it was invented for

https://mathoverflow.net/a/2284


Yeah, I know a bit about the influence of Grothendieck and the construction of algebraic geometry, but really, and alg geo is cool, but then again, jobs. One potential advisor I know does higher homotopy theory so that's a possibility.
2017-04-23, 12:25 PM #1497
As Alan Kay said to a HN poster asking about whether or not people at PARC were dropping acid in order to 'see' the future of personal computing: a little bit goes a long way.

It's great that you've had a chance to talk to Baez about this stuff--his weekly finds archive are a goldmine for those looking for abstract connections between math and physics. But you have to understand that in my drug analogy, well let's just say that Mr. Baez is pretty much the Timothy Leary of category theory.
2017-04-23, 8:37 PM #1498
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
As Alan Kay said to a HN poster asking about whether or not people at PARC were dropping acid in order to 'see' the future of personal computing: a little bit goes a long way.

It's great that you've had a chance to talk to Baez about this stuff--his weekly finds archive are a goldmine for those looking for abstract connections between math and physics. But you have to understand that in my drug analogy, well let's just say that Mr. Baez is pretty much the Timothy Leary of category theory.


Well, guarantee me funding and I'll spend all day studying category theory. It's cool **** just, you know, gotta eat.
2017-04-23, 8:46 PM #1499
Quote:
gotta eat.


Nonsense, you just aren't working hard enough to bootstrap your category-theoretic startup into ramen-profitability.
2017-04-23, 8:50 PM #1500
What's the difference between a mathematician and a large pizza?

One is a genus-1 surface, and the other can feed a family of four.
2017-04-23, 8:52 PM #1501
But yes it sadly looks like your brain will be categori-fried just like Timothy's, judging by your "all day" remark.

There are more interesting branches of math, like the ones which use category theory.

Quote:
I think that it is a relatively good approximation to truth — which is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations — that mathematical ideas originate in empirics. But, once they are conceived, the subject begins to live a peculiar life of its own and is … governed by almost entirely aesthetical motivations. In other words, at a great distance from its empirical source, or after much "abstract" inbreeding, a mathematical subject is in danger of degeneration. Whenever this stage is reached the only remedy seems to me to be the rejuvenating return to the source: the reinjection of more or less directly empirical ideas.


--John von Neumann
2017-04-23, 9:04 PM #1502
category theory <=> lambda calculus <=> theorem proving
2017-04-23, 9:25 PM #1503
There's that too, if you're willing to add mathematical logic to your purview. But you don't have to be working on foundational problems of mathematics to use rigorous language.

Categorical language--as it is mostly used by (non-C.S.) mathematicians--is to naïve set theory, as the fancier foundational projects that try and use topos theory to subsume axiomatic set theory under category theory is to the 20th century attempts to build a foundation of mathematics on axiomatic set theory.

(Interestingly, to my knowledge, a lot of theoretical computer science came out of that 20th century axiomatic set theory stuff, especially the attempts to formalize more and more powerful theories using recursive function theory. Stephen Cole Kleene is a name that comes to mind here.)

In other words, if you can be bothered to phrase your statements in the language of naïve set theory, you can do the same in categorical language. It's more modern and concise, though, and you get a lot of things for free (I once read a remark which characterized category theory as a language which makes it trivial to prove trivial things).
2017-04-23, 9:25 PM #1504
Here, I'll get this back on track.

Originally posted by Spook:
Oh is that why the 70s was the peak of western civilization and we have been circling the drain and producing superficial gains since then?

Oh wait but technology


Durable goods monopolies have a profit incentive to make their goods less durable to encourage shorter repeat sales cycles. One way to do this is to literally reduce product durability, as seen in household appliances, a strategy that is only possible with monopoly or collusion. Another way, which is preferred whenever possible since it resembles genuine competition, is to make each iteration of your product so much better than the previous iteration that consumers voluntarily and rationally discard functional older models in order to purchase new ones. This is the approach used by the personal computing industry. Thus, significant technological innovation is possible, even when the firm has no direct competitors.

Computing in specific, though, is basically capitalism's great horror show. It's a great example of how quickly the cottage industries of impassioned professionals can be devoured and transformed by capital into crushing monopolies. I'd expound, but really that would be overselling things after the previous paragraph.
2017-04-23, 9:27 PM #1505
Originally posted by Jon`C:
What's the difference between a mathematician and a large pizza?

One is a genus-1 surface, and the other can feed a family of four.


The more piercings you get, the higher your genus, maybe some people know more than us.

Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Nonsense, you just aren't working hard enough to bootstrap your category-theoretic startup into ramen-profitability.


Nonsense, my program is one of the more generous programs. I'll be able to afford scallions in my ramen. Until I finish my degree.
2017-04-23, 9:34 PM #1506
Originally posted by Reid:
The more piercings you get, the higher your genus, maybe some people know more than us.


Pizza is genus-0. So the higher your genus, the less employable you are, and the less you are able to feed a family of four.

Clearly the answer is a two part epoxy.
2017-04-23, 9:35 PM #1507
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Here, I'll get this back on track.

Durable goods monopolies have a profit incentive to make their goods less durable to encourage shorter repeat sales cycles. One way to do this is to literally reduce product durability, as seen in household appliances, a strategy that is only possible with monopoly or collusion. Another way, which is preferred whenever possible since it resembles genuine competition, is to make each iteration of your product so much better than the previous iteration that consumers voluntarily and rationally discard functional older models in order to purchase new ones. This is the approach used by the personal computing industry. Thus, significant technological innovation is possible, even when the firm has no direct competitors.

Computing in specific, though, is basically capitalism's great horror show. It's a great example of how quickly the cottage industries of impassioned professionals can be devoured and transformed by capital into crushing monopolies. I'd expound, but really that would be overselling things after the previous paragraph.


Yeah, getting a tech job sounded exciting to me in the 00's, but more and more it appears to be soul-crushing labor. Like I'm probably making a poor economic choice to work on a PhD instead of getting more familiar with programming, but none of the work sounds entertaining, so I'm just going to continue doing the types of research I find myself in which involve lots of programming so I can pad out a resume someday, hoping I can do something interesting with my time. In other words, I feel the cottage industry approach is dying.
2017-04-23, 9:40 PM #1508
All labor is soul crushing. The only way out is the epoxy.

All hail the epoxy!
2017-04-23, 9:40 PM #1509
In Jon's correspondence between durable goods capital harvesting by primary industry, and quaternary capital being vaccumed up by existing companies, doesn't earning a PhD put you in a pretty good position to be "bought" as a capital good for a Google or a Microsoft?

I mean it might not be as interesting as becoming a professor, but then again you won't have to do two postdocs just to teach calculus at a small college in a rural town?

Of course the chance of beating the odds and ending up with a more lucrative professorship is worth the effort I am sure, since research in pure mathematics is potentially such a rewarding activity for its own sake, so why not try....
2017-04-23, 9:42 PM #1510
Being sold as capital is not a good thing. Holy moly. If you get into that business, the side you want to be on is selling others.
2017-04-23, 9:43 PM #1511
God, it's like you people learned nothing from the communist manifesto.
2017-04-23, 9:44 PM #1512
Yeah, the ideal is that I'll have to balls to start my own business project, or get a cushy academic job and cruise, working for other people* is my worst phobia**.

* Fortunately my PhD program has no grading responsibilities

**Not literally
2017-04-23, 9:46 PM #1513
Well, I imagine there are plenty of PhDs who seem to do pretty well quitting Google and founding a company with the people they met while working there, maybe even with Google buying their company and folding them back into the corporation. If they get paid well, why not?
2017-04-23, 9:46 PM #1514
Originally posted by Jon`C:
All labor is soul crushing. The only way out is the epoxy.

All hail the epoxy!


I'm assuming rubber epoxy maintains it's seal the longest on human flesh?

This must be the cybernetic advancement Elon Musk was muttering about on the idiot news recently.
2017-04-23, 9:50 PM #1515
First, sorry I don't respond more. I generally lack the enthusiasm to do so. I'm not really intentionally disregarding previous posts.

Originally posted by Jon`C:
One way to do this is to literally reduce product durability, as seen in household appliances, a strategy that is only possible with monopoly or collusion. Another way, which is preferred whenever possible since it resembles genuine competition, is to make each iteration of your product so much better than the previous iteration that consumers voluntarily and rationally discard functional older models in order to purchase new ones. This is the approach used by the personal computing industry. Thus, significant technological innovation is possible, even when the firm has no direct competitors.


Funny. With regards to appliances you kind of see both. I mean, who doesn't walk by a nice refrigerator in a store, open it up, and kind of think they need it? There's no significant difference but there will be some feature you think is cool and wish you had. We had to buy a refrigerator for this house when we moved in and when we lived in Kansas we had to buy one for that house. We were able to keep that one and it's in this kitchen now and the older refrigerator is in the garage. We really are aberrations. The normal thing would have been to buy a new one when we came back. We did replace other appliance that needed to be repaired or replaced.

I am big on repairing things. My mom was having problems with her washing machine. I pulled out a plastic component that was stripped. The replacement part was much better built. I've replaced a faulty pump on our washing machine and I found a faulty connection in our refrigerator. All of these repairs would have been expensive service calls or poor reasons to replace the appliances. I don't know how much of the shoddy workmanship is intentional or just the consequence of cutting cost in order to make more profit.

But this kind of goes to what I was talking about personal choice earlier. I can choose not to purchase new appliances, computers, cars, etc. and maintain the ones I have far past the societal norm. I know that makes me weird.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-23, 9:53 PM #1516
Originally posted by Wookie06:
I don't know how much of the shoddy workmanship is intentional or just the consequence of cutting cost in order to make more profit.


Yes.
2017-04-23, 9:54 PM #1517
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Well, I imagine there are plenty of PhDs who seem to do pretty well quitting Google and founding a company with the people they met while working there, maybe even with Google buying their company and folding them back into the corporation. If they get paid well, why not?


Eh. As long as I have a secure future I'm actually not that worried in having tons of money. It wouldn't be something I'd reject though.
2017-04-23, 9:58 PM #1518
Wait, you are getting a PhD in mathematics, and you don't plan to work for a big company like Google (that seems hell bent on vacuuming up budding C.S. researchers from academia by dangling big salaries in their faces) in the event that you don't become a professor? :confused:

>Ph.D. in Math
>any job I want
>$300k starting

Or are you saying that you actually want to go through all that trouble to become a credentialed researcher, and then use that capital for your own rational ends?

Because selling out seems a lot easier.
2017-04-23, 10:05 PM #1519
A mathematics PHD is worth that much? God dammit, why didn't someone tell me this sooner?
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2017-04-23, 10:06 PM #1520
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Well, I imagine there are plenty of PhDs who seem to do pretty well quitting Google and founding a company with the people they met while working there, maybe even with Google buying their company and folding them back into the corporation. If they get paid well, why not?
Googlers never really struck me as the kinds of people who would try to make it on their own. What with the whole hiring right out of school, Professor Mom thing they've got going on. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but there aren't many companies that can retain a critical mass of such people ~20 years in.



Originally posted by Wookie06:
First, sorry I don't respond more. I generally lack the enthusiasm to do so. I'm not really intentionally disregarding previous posts.



Funny. With regards to appliances you kind of see both. I mean, who doesn't walk by a nice refrigerator in a store, open it up, and kind of think they need it? There's no significant difference but there will be some feature you think is cool and wish you had. We had to buy a refrigerator for this house when we moved in and when we lived in Kansas we had to buy one for that house. We were able to keep that one and it's in this kitchen now and the older refrigerator is in the garage. We really are aberrations. The normal thing would have been to buy a new one when we came back. We did replace other appliance that needed to be repaired or replaced.

I am big on repairing things. My mom was having problems with her washing machine. I pulled out a plastic component that was stripped. The replacement part was much better built. I've replaced a faulty pump on our washing machine and I found a faulty connection in our refrigerator. All of these repairs would have been expensive service calls or poor reasons to replace the appliances. I don't know how much of the shoddy workmanship is intentional or just the consequence of cutting cost in order to make more profit.

But this kind of goes to what I was talking about personal choice earlier. I can choose not to purchase new appliances, computers, cars, etc. and maintain the ones I have far past the societal norm. I know that makes me weird.


Steel parts are spray painted now instead of powder coated, good luck fixing your washing machine when the rolled edges start corroding from the inside out.
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401

↑ Up to the top!