Their argument is that ln(z) where z is a complex number is a multi-valued function, so the statement "Explore why i^i is real number" could be misinterpreted as i^i = a single well-defined real value.
Yes, but it seems strange to claim that i^i isn't anything. That just completely ignores what's interesting, namely that i(π/2 + 2πk) is real for all k ∈ Z.
In maths, an expression only ever equals a single number. You can't say i^i = e^(-pi/2) and then also say that i^i = e^(3 pi / 2), because if i^i equals two things, then those two things are also equal to each other, and then we get that e^(-pi/2) = e^(3 pi / 2), which is wrong.
Riemann surfaces are the only way to fix this. And they're not even that hard to understand, but I'm not sure if you do.
Apologies if this is pedantic but "multi-valued function" is not a thing. The function doesn't have multiple values here. Saying "multi-valued function" is not just a way of misleading people about what's really happening, but it's almost the perfect way to stop people from finding out. Do people who say "multi-valued function" know what's really happening? Do you know what a Riemann surface is?
Do you know what a Riemann surface is? Because if you don't, then you don't know what you're talking about - and you should stop getting people confused.
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
Others answered the main reason, but sometimes I find myself using "PRC" to indicate a particular government (~1950-Present) which unlike "China" excludes past dynasties, and is less-likely to be interpreted as referring to the people or culture.
For example, the potential differences between:
"France has always been X."
"The French republic has always been X."
"The French monarchy has always been X."
I don't critique France['s governments] enough to know the right way of identifying them all, but I trust the underlying problem has been adequately demonstrated. :p
> The French Republic has always existed in the nuclear age?
There were two different French republics since 1945 with their own different consitutions (one with a parliamentary system and one semi-presidential).
I'm not sure the quip you are responding to make sense but it's always interesting to remind people that since the USA were founded, France went through three different monarchic systems, two empires, two periods where exceptional constitutional rules applied and five different republics. It puts in light how exceptional the American deference towards their original constitution is.
Considering that the current republic was put in place in 1958, it's also interesting to consider that France managed to be a great power for 150 years while being politicaly extremely unstable. It puts in perspective the current world events.
> The French Republic has always been founded by De Gaulle?
Neither have. Michel Debré was the head of the government supervising the constitutional assembly which drafted the constitution of the 5th French Republic.
Very minor nitpick but I'd have said France went through four different monarchic systems in that time frame (1776-1790 Ancient Régime, 1791-1792 Constitutional monarchy, 1814-1830 Bourbon Restoration and 1830-1848 July Monarchy)
I was lumping the brief period of constitutional monarchy with the convention in one of the exceptional rules, the other being another lumping of Vichy and everything that followed until the fourth while I folded the Consulate into the first empire but yes, you are entirely right, I’m oversimplifying.
It's not really common except in a specific political climate (specifically one pressured by propaganda). Unlike the examples of the two koreas, colloquially the two chinas (communist china - commonly known as china - and fascist china, commonly known as taiwan) are not confusing. There's very little advantage to be gained by referring to what every reader knows as china as the PRC other than to emphasise some veiled pressure for people to figure out why on earth anyone would use that name. And in so doing discover the history of taiwan (but not too much history, lest we figure out that the origins of taiwan suck big time).
The part that is timing out is actually the JS interpreter, not the graph viewer. It’s a total hack to get SpiderMonkey running on the page at all.
The full Frankenstein stack is: SpiderMonkey compiled in arm emulation mode, to a WASI 0.1 module, adapted to a WASI 0.2 component, transpiled to the web with jco, running in some random WASI shim.
We do this because the JS runtime needs inline caches to be filled out before optimization, which requires an JIT and actual execution of machine code. Otherwise you just get a graph full of Unreachable. Frankly I’m amazed it works at all.
The Piano chart on prototype is an example, that's for discussing piano keys and chords on basic level.
I already implemented (in other prototype) diagram for event calculus (i.e. consideration of event stream through addition of new events like rollback, modify etc.)
On paper I have designs for point-in-time designs, scenario divergence and also some fun ones like a bingo card template. Diagrams are one thing, but there's also a design for collaboration and play-replay capabilities.
That being said, that's only a design right now with a simple prototype on the website :)
I imagine that, if attested cameras like this come into any sort of regular use, you'll see additional layers of metadata mixed into the signature—a depth map, GPS, accelerometers, operator biometrics etc, none of which are necessarily infallible, but which certainly create considerable barriers to faking things.
