Kogasa

Yes, speed and the benefits of all the tooling and static analysis they’re bringing to Python. Python is great for many things but “analyzing Python” isn’t necessarily one of them.

That’s what the /etc/foo.conf.d/ is for :DDDDD

It means they admit they were wrong and you were correct. As in, “I have been corrected.”

The argument describes an algorithm that can be translated into code.

1/(1-x)^(2) at 0 is 1

(1/(1-x)^(2) - 1)/x = (1 - 1 + 2x - x^(2))/x = 2 - x at 0 is 2

(1/(1-x)^(2) - 1 - 2x)/x^(2) = ((1 - 1 + 2x - x^(2) - 2x + 4x^(2) - 2x^(3))/x(2) = 3 - 2x at 0 is 3

and so on

Let f(x) = 1/((x-1)^(2)). Given an integer n, compute the nth derivative of f as f^((n))(x) = (-1)^{(n)(n+1)!/((x-1)}(n+2)), which lets us write f as the Taylor series about x=0 whose nth coefficient is f^((n))(0)/n! = (-1)^(-2)(n+1)!/n! = n+1. We now compute the nth coefficient with a simple recursion. To show this process works, we make an inductive argument: the 0th coefficient is f(0) = 1, and the nth coefficient is (f(x) - (1 + 2x + 3x^(2) + … + nx^(n-1)))/x(n) evaluated at x=0. Note that each coefficient appearing in the previous expression is an integer between 0 and n, so by inductive hypothesis we can represent it by incrementing 0 repeatedly. Unfortunately, the expression we’ve written isn’t well-defined at x=0 since we can’t divide by 0, but as we’d expect, the limit as x->0 is defined and equal to n+1 (exercise: prove this). To compute the limit, we can evaluate at a sufficiently small value of x and argue by monotonicity or squeezing that n+1 is the nearest integer. (exercise: determine an upper bound for |x| that makes this argument work and fill in the details). Finally, evaluate our expression at the appropriate value of x for each k from 1 to n, using each result to compute the next, until we are able to write each coefficient. Evaluate one more time and conclude by rounding to the value of n+1. This increments n.

foo terminal

foot

It’s not all of Microsoft, you just can’t download ISOs from their website.

Microsoft blocks people from downloading stuff all the time for unknowable reasons. You have to either reset your IP or go through customer support to fix it. I did the latter and they did not tell me why I was blocked in the first place.

But something has to be written on the birth certificate and social security card, and that’s what everything else will expect you to use. I think just due to technical limitations (e.g. of the printer/template for those things) it wouldn’t be allowed, but I dunno about legally

Java is a fine choice. Much prefer it over pseudocode.

I have read programs a lot shorter than 500 lines which I don’t have the expertise to write.

Okay, but this makes more sense as an instance method rather than a static one

Instance properties are PascalCase.

Yeah, properties (like a field but with a getter and/or setter method, may or may not be backed by a field) are PascalCase

That’s an instance property

Yes, with Iosevka font

Hom functors exist for locally small categories, which is just to say that the hom classes are sets. The distinction can be ignored often because local smallness is a trivial consequence of how the category is defined, but it’s not generally true

The benefits don’t halve. It’s the difference between noticing stroboscopic effects and not noticing them. Between not being able to comfortably track fast moving objects and being able to. 1000Hz is a point at which several limitations of LCD technology become invisible.

It’s extremely easy to tell the difference. I can’t tell you what’s wrong with their experiment as I don’t know exactly what they did, but they clearly fucked it. If you’re looking at a static image, you can’t differentiate 240Hz from 30Hz. You need a test that actually demonstrates the difference.

That would make it impure