363849473754

Joined 5 years ago

Karma

51

Submissions

34

Member since

Jun 19

View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 4 months ago

For a more advanced book: Category Theory in Context by Emily Riehl

Comment · 4 months ago

F. William Lawvere - Conceptual Mathematics: A First Introduction to Categories

Eugenia Cheng - The Joy of Abstraction: An Exploration of Math, Category Theory, and Life

She builds up to the category theory chapters.

Book club: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLhgq-BqyZ7i7tEEQVG5rlOG8y...

Comment · 1 year ago

GRPO project is neat. Would you be willing to do a Karpathy-style explainer, breaking down the algorithm from scratch? It’s hard to understand on its own without prior background knowledge.

Comment · 2 years ago

Understood! How much is it to enroll in your “Methods of Proof” course or in Math Academy more generally? I didn’t didn’t quite understand how it works based on the FAQ, is it lecture-problem based with an interactive testing element for course placement?

Comment · 2 years ago

Thank you for the response and for making these resources fully available.

Do you plan to make a proofs based book available as well?

Comment · 2 years ago

This is phenomenal. I currently don’t have a great internet connection, so the pdfs won’t load. Do these books have solutions?

Comment · 2 years ago

What is the pricing model for this? I’m interested in enrolling.

Comment · 2 years ago

Thanks! So, you are considering expanding the Zero to Hero series to include building a basic GPT-2 toy chatbot? I believe you mentioned in one of the early lectures that you planned to include building a toy version of Dalle. Do you still have plans for that as well?

Comment · 2 years ago

You might have covered this topic before, but I'm curious about the main performance differences between nanoGPT and llm.c. I'm planning to take your "Zero to Hero" course, and I'd like to know how capable the nanoGPT chatbot you'll build is. Is its quality comparable to GPT-2 when used as a chatbot?

Comment · 3 years ago

Do you plan to do any investigative pieces on AI alignment? I’d be interested in a piece that interviewed people like Paul Christino, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Chris Olah and the like. Covering opposing views from doomerism to e/acc.

Comment · 3 years ago

Thanks for the link. I like taking these for fun, any idea where to find the advanced set for older teenagers and adults?

Comment · 4 years ago

Has anyone ever had success on an app like Hinge, then deleted it only to see a large drop in your success rate when nothing else changed about your profile?

If so, it could be due to things like this:

https://tech.okcupid.com/evaluating-perceptual-image-hashes-...

Match Group owns OkCupid, Hinge, Tinder and so on.. so wouldn’t be surprising if they all used the same or similar algorithms for spam prevention and noob boost abuse.

They probably also collect other data like your phone number, deviceID, etc.

This is bad because if you ever delete your profile and remake it then your internal ranking could plummet due to these aggressive spam filters.

Comment · 4 years ago

>“ There is a facebook group called "Topology Without Tears Readers" where readers of the book can communicate with each other. But this is definitely not a place to ask others to solve your homework problems. If you ask questions like "How do you solve the problem ...." your post will be removed and you will probably be blocked from this group.”

My complaint with this is the audience reading this book aren’t students in classes and likely a lot of them don’t have access to mathematicians or professors. Working with others is a great way to learn how to properly do proofs when first starting out. I think the FB groups / discord groups or whatever communities of learners should discuss their proofs and suss out difficulties or logical errors with each other.

This approach instead seems to assume the learner will know whenever they develop a correct proof but often one can just fool themselves into thinking their proofs are correct or even get utterly stuck. Or it assumes seeing solutions will “rob” the readers of learning.

Also, who really cares? Most of the people working through this book aren’t getting a grade from it. If they want to rob themselves of learning something just by seeing solutions without thinking first, then that’s on them.

Otherwise, beyond that complaint this seems like a good resource and it’s impressive it’s all free. I’d also recommend another topology book that’s free https://topology.mitpress.mit.edu/, albeit it’s more advanced.