Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — mcnamaratw

mcnamaratw

HN member
Joined
Sun, Mar 08, 2015, 7:12 PM UTC
HN karma
350
Public activity
338 items

About mcnamaratw

Tom McNamara, tom@envelopemodeling.com

Envelope: Turn your engineering problem into an animated solution in one afternoon

Free demo: http://envelopemodeling.com/intro.html

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #45636825

    Of course there were analog 'computers' but vacuum tubes were also used to realize digital computers in the early days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum-tube_computer

  2. comment
    Comment #44349242

    Maybe we agree, maybe we disagree. You got specific works and authors? That would help a lot.

  3. comment
    Comment #44349097

    Don’t be a d**k. Lots of literary fiction is perfectly readable for normal humans. Lots of what isn’t accessible is just not that enjoyable to anybody. I’m happy to debate … but on…

  4. comment
    Comment #44349027

    “This is fundamental misunderstanding of literature” No it is not. It is a central and vital part of literature. Wound you like to have a friendly debate, each of us using quotatio…

  5. comment
    Comment #44348970

    Great example. It is absolutely a matter of taste. Sadly noise music doesn’t support a lot of full-time jobs compared to writing songs more or less the way the Beatles did. Which w…

  6. comment
    Comment #44348924

    Then why is Kurt Vonnegut still so popular?

  7. comment
    Comment #44348860

    What is that stuff? Is Kurt Vonnegut that stuff? Folks, downvoting the comment above is literally destroying what you claim to support.

  8. comment
    Comment #44348670

    Of course that’s punishing, though 75% may be closer than 90%. But I don’t buy it as the root cause. Where is the new Susanna Kaysen or Lionel Shriver or Laurie Moore or Barbara Ki…

  9. comment
    Comment #44348563

    But that’s new. Until ca 1970-2000, people read literary fiction because it was high quality, much more than because it was unrelateable. O’Hara, Salinger, and Franzen were not wri…

  10. comment
    Comment #44348534

    That’s the old standby argument, and it may be right. I can’t really read John Barth or George Saunders the way I can read Richard Russo or Lionel Shriver or Kurt Vonnegut or Micha…

  11. comment
    Comment #44090924

    It’s really not accurate to say that a photon has no position at all. How would a photodiode work? You have to be careful with this stuff. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questio…

  12. comment
    Comment #44087170

    Not all of that is true. Who played with the un-updated CD version?

  13. comment
    Comment #44083613

    Sure. But inventing something better is not reinventing the wheel. Those are two completely different activities.

  14. comment
    Comment #44083562

    I’m sorry but you’re mistaken. The wheel was invented thousands of years ago.

  15. comment
    Comment #44083553

    Yeah. Ok. You want the fine print? Reinvent the wheel … for your own learning and fun. Or invent a different kind of wheel. Don’t reinvent the wheel on a tight deadline while the r…

  16. comment
    Comment #44067946

    No, dB are always power gain.

  17. comment
    Comment #42567738

    Kind of agree. But pervasive downvoting by folks who don’t understand the subject is a form of forum rot. The risk is only that we expose the rot. Not such a terrible risk, because…

  18. comment
    Comment #42566524

    Dale Gribble

  19. comment
    Comment #42552754

    The economic boom isn’t helping everyone.

  20. comment
    Comment #42367856

    The book is from basically the “experimental music” school of electronic music. The idea was/is that music will be completely transmuted by electronics and computers, leaving tradi…

  21. comment
    Comment #42290768

    Thanks. Agreed, that could have been a good point to mention that Laplace transforms are more or less the same as Heaviside’s method. As I read it, the article leaves the opposite …

  22. comment
    Comment #42290208

    Great. Possibly missed the opportunity to point out that Heaviside’s method is more or less the same as Laplace transforms.

  23. comment
    Comment #41970106

    Good point, your suppliers need to get singular too. And sales. And management or investors.

  24. comment
    Comment #41970058

    Just on the naive math level, a simple growing exponential has no singularity at any finite time. I’m sure Vinge knows that but some of those dudes don’t seem to. EDIT Rest in peac…

  25. comment
    Comment #41827847

    It’s cool that you’re a native speaker, but the typical HN commenter is at a much higher level of proficiency than that. Irony notice. This comment contains irony.