Don’t Trust a Path Across Two Syscalls
Wasn’t this a common knowledge among application developers? File system is volatile, and can change any time, do not assume persistence of it. I heard about the principle from ghcup developer a few years ago.
I am not a topologist, but I can try…
A space (shape) is contractible if you can “contract” (shrink) it to a point without cutting, pinching or punching through holes. For example, a mattress is contractible, since you can shrink it to the center - each point can follow the line to the center, continuously. Meanwhile, a doughnut, a circle or a hollow sphere are not contractible, you can never remove the inner “hole” to shrink to a point without cutting.
In general, any dimensional sphere is not contractible… Until it isn’t - infinite dimensional sphere is . Somehow, it loses the “hollow space” inside.
I guess it was misjudgement saying Trump is smart for doing so, when he could just… not start a war and tried other disruptions instead.
I did want to ask if war is going to end and Trump is getting away with it, but decided to go one step too far (maybe for virality? Dumb me again)
So much for me believing there is truly no stupid questions.
Is this opinion piece implying that quantum computing researchers should stop researching because current quantum computers are currently less than proof of concept? Is technology supposed to be fully mature from the beginning?
I don’t think this is matter of mathematics, it is difficult to define what “software only running on desired machine” is. Like, do you permit functionally equal software with different code? With painstaking effort, functionality should be approximated fairly close (although idk what that means in mathematical context) On the other hand, requiring exact code is likely not what they want.
Cryptographic guarantee requires mathematical specification, which seems ill-fit in this scenario.
Huh, interesting that pop could be realized this time.
I was like, why aren’t you publishing it to a conference/journal if it is good? Then realized that you are doing exactly that. Kudos for the work, looking forward to the progress!
I really don’t get the prevalence of the attitude “If we don’t see it with light, it does not exist”. Is it that improbable that there is some matter which does not interact with light? imo, similar argument could be made to deny existence of atoms - we cannot see it directly.