Viewing profile — throwupper247
throwupper247
HN member- Joined
- Sat, Jan 02, 2016, 1:52 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 12
- Public activity
- 47 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About throwupper247
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #11031106
Perfect information isn't true, you don't exactly know the opponents next move. This broadens the search tree exponentially. Generally, with many hard problems, the size of the pro…
-
comment
Comment #11008065
The irony is, germany was controlled by the allies then, including the US, the ones whose population you just called ignorant, that watches movies about prostitutes' escapedes or w…
- comment
-
comment
Comment #11006551
The US prisson system comes to mind ... completely ridiculous comparison, I know
-
comment
Comment #11006478
What about Pascal's Wager? It's nonsense, given an impossible number of gods to honour
-
comment
Comment #11006230
I didn't talk about growth, i was specifically thinking about a comment that called our number system logarithmic and it stands to reason, if you wan't to find x in 10^x=y, unless …
-
comment
Comment #11001513
I was heavily downvoted for snarky and spiteful comments and ultimately hellbanned as I tryed to pack up my cynicism in elaborate arguments. The downvote privileged are pretty vigo…
-
comment
Comment #10997048
I could do without 90% of those websites, i suppose
-
comment
Comment #10973424
So, in the long run they can train new folks with some of the brain that is still left. To be honest, they didn't exactly strike me with prolific creativity, rather their business …
-
comment
Comment #10973409
So, they can train new folks with some of the brain that is still left. To be honest, they didn't exactly strike me with prolific creativity, rather their business enterpreneurship…
-
comment
Comment #10973237
In the decimal system it is just as easy to associate 5+5=10. 5xN is easier to remember than 16xN on account of 5 being the smaller number. 2^n is logarithmic whereas 5*n is linear…
-
comment
Comment #10958414
I'm not sure if those are the meassures that guide the decision: Searching in linked lists is suboptimal (was it O(n)?), as is their cache performance. Sure, with small lists, that…
-
comment
Comment #10935076
Having been mildly disappointed by the simplicity of monoids, after intimidation from the complexity in maths, i expect that something like an adjunction is something already known…
-
comment
Comment #10920696
The dangerous qualities of human thought are rather simple sometimes, the difference wouldn't be that big, probably.
-
comment
Comment #10919836
The Credit Card probably contains a 8051 core, anyhow.
-
comment
Comment #10884288
It wasn't displaced, it delegated|dispatched|forked and is having a hell of a time piecing the puzzle and getting rid of the excess.
-
comment
Comment #10884263
But it was specifically said that providing those answeres was a benefit.
-
comment
Comment #10884037
Losing focus and wondering about the start of the train of thought , stackoverfloing while recursing is a first order intrinsic problem.
-
comment
Comment #10883716
For science and education, Fair Use terms may be applied generously.
-
comment
Comment #10877715
I've just written an Idris programm that determined "your mothers phone number", hows that for arbitrary facts? (tip of the hat to xkcd.)
-
comment
Comment #10872013
No you don't always have to, it has emotions all by itself, as you said. You are unable to make a connection from holding its hand to being responsible for its actions ? Actions in…
-
comment
Comment #10871933
The NN doesn't train itself, you train it, whereas the baby is first of all traines with intrinsic stimuli, its consciousness and emotions. Sure, you might not exactly know how the…
-
comment
Comment #10871871
You don't need an entire theory to see that the premisses is contrived. If the answer is as long as the problem statement, that's enough. Of course, if a philosopher sees the whole…
-
comment
Comment #10871837
*Dijkstra
-
comment
Comment #10871832
No, he shares knowledge with the questioner (beyond time, if that makes sense), hence he implicitly had probable knowledge of the questions.