youzicha | 2 years ago | on: Fixed-point combinator
youzicha's comments
youzicha | 2 years ago | on: Fixed-point combinator
> The key to understanding the fixpoint theorem, for me anyway, was realizing that when it says FG=G, it does not mean that for every F there is a G such that by calling F with parameter G one can get back G. I mention this in the blog post, above. The equality operator in FG=G is the equivalence relation induced by the calculus rewriting relation: that is, it's the symmetric reflexive transitive closure of the rewriting step relation. When you look at the proof of the theorem, it actually works by constructing an expression G such that evaluating G produces, as an intermediate result, FG. There is no need for F to even be a function, and if F is a function it doesn't matter what, if anything, F would actually do when called, because the proof of the theorem doesn't involve calling F.
I think the name "fixpoint combinator" is kindof bad, it it was called e.g. the "recursion combinator" I think people would find it more intuitive.
[0] https://fexpr.blogspot.com/2013/07/bypassing-no-go-theorems....
youzicha | 5 years ago | on: What Colour are your bits? (2004)
> Suppose you publish an article that happens to contain a sentence identical to one from this article, like "The law sees Colour." That's just four words, all of them common, and it might well occur by random chance. Maybe you were thinking about similar ideas to mine and happened to put the words together in a similar way. If so, fine. But maybe you wrote "your" article by cutting and pasting from "mine" - in that case, the words have the Colour that obligates you to follow quotation procedures and worry about "derivative work" status under copyright law and so on.
There was a real court case in 2012 which I think is interesting because it's very similar to this example. A photographer was accused of "copying" the concept of taking a photo of a red bus in front of a grey Houses of Parliament. He defended himself by saying that that those ideas are very common and should not be copyrightable---but failed:
https://youzicha.tumblr.com/post/162846191544/what-colour-ar...
youzicha | 6 years ago | on: An actor who was really stabbed on stage
youzicha | 6 years ago | on: Teacher Effects on Student Achievement and Height: A Cautionary Tale
https://xhxhxhx.tumblr.com/post/189336550187/teacher-effects...
youzicha | 7 years ago | on: A DIY Cruise Missile (2004)
https://youzicha.tumblr.com/post/166323190559/documents-bann...
youzicha | 7 years ago | on: Varieties of Argumentative Experience
I would be interested to see a survey of the reading speed of people who like/dislike SSC. It could be that the fans tend to skim texts and read more words per minute, so the posts don't feel as long.
youzicha | 8 years ago | on: H-1B abuse: Bay Area tech workers from India paid a pittance, feds say
http://alexyar.tumblr.com/post/156649015342/anyway-heres-the...
youzicha | 8 years ago | on: Translations of the Dao De Jing
https://youzicha.tumblr.com/post/142657117089/philological-n... http://www.jstor.org/stable/2718364?s
youzicha | 8 years ago | on: Translator's Note to the Odyssey
> The sexualization of translation appears perhaps most familiarly in the tag les belles infideles--like women, the adage goes, translations should be either beautiful or faithful. The tag is made possible both by the rhyme in French and by the fact that the word traduction is a feminine one, thus making les beaux infideles impossible. This tag owes its longevity--it was coined in the seventeenth century--to more than phonetic similarity: what gives it the appearance of truth is that it has captured a cultural complicity between the issues of fidelity in translation and in marriage. For les belles infideles, fidelity is defined by an implicit contract between translation (as woman) and original (as husband, father, or author).
and gives various other examples where people use (patriarchal) marriage as an image.
youzicha | 8 years ago | on: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution
Someone else also pointed out that the U.S. population has increased by about 20% since the 1980s, so although the absolute number of women CS students are about the same, that still means it's proportionally going down.