MrBlueIncognito

As the old saying goes, “all roads lead to Rome.”

That would also eliminate any positive effect that HN has on Google search results.

The idea of UBI, to me at least, is a mind-blowing one. It’s a shame something like this doesn’t exist on a large scale already. I know I’m probably missing something important here, but can someone outline any good reasons, if any, that it hasn’t been implemented yet?

I don’t know if it’s just me, but I’m terribly lost in the search for the right texts. Every time I come across a new book/resource, it compounds the confusion. I find myself incapable of sitting down with a book and working through it without switching to another book in-between. I’d be really happy to hear if anyone has found a solution to this unproductive but sticky habit.

I wonder if there will be a time when textbooks will be created in digital-first format, instead of being mere replicas of what print books are. It doesn’t have to be static text and images on A4 pages.

I went through them a long time ago. It’s not the most in-depth resource, but you will learn enough calculus for when you need to actually apply it or even just pass tests. Also learning math on KA is really fun, there’s something they just get right. I’d definitely recommend giving it a try.

If you don’t feel satisfied after going through the courses, you can always pick up a book afterwards to dig deeper.

The self-talk seems to be less than optimal. They are unable to truly accept their own love:

> Self: Hey Chase! Do you like me?

> Chase: I love your life!

> Self: Um

> Chase: Yeah, you’re so lucky. There’s not another life I’d want you to have

> Self: Ok

Count me in!

> It's marked as Known Unknowns, but what is unknown?

The infinite digits of pi that we don't know. But we do know that they exist, so pi, or any other irrational number, will aptly be called a "known unknown."

> Virtually all numbers are irrational.

For every n irrational numbers you name, I can name n+1 rationals. There is no firm basis to the argument that there are somehow more irrational numbers than rational numbers.

It is a really well-written piece that resonates within me, but I am compelled to point out that not everything that the author speaks of is a lost cause. It would suit us better to stop brooding over it, and to focus instead on what can be done to alleviate the situation. Just to offer a few examples:

> When will we have time to sit down, alone or with our loved ones, and look through it all?

The For You page in the iOS Photos app is a good attempt at resolving this. Every now and then the app will notify you with an algorithmically curated album that somehow does very well at keeping out the random food-pics, sunsets, and unmemorable minutiae. This system has its flaws, but it is something. And it has the potential to be a lot better in the future.

> Will Youtube still be there in 50 years? Will Instagram and Dropbox?

Perhaps it is time initiatives like the Internet Archive and GitHub Archived Project were scaled up with better funding. Even for now a lot of cultural knowledge is there and it is safe. People in the distant future will have plenty to look back upon. There are archived copies of HN, Wikipedia, Reddit, and so on.

> If you're young today, your formative years depend on auto-deleted snapchat videos, short-lived memes, stories told in computer games likely unplayable in 30 years.

As someone still in their formative years in this era, I seem to have more mementos (both digital and physical) than my parents did at my age. The only difference seems to be that my photographs are digital and more numerous. Also, the games that my parents once played are unplayable now.

Could it be that everybody has the same experience of fading memories as they age, regardless of the era they were born in? I would think so. In that case it certainly isn't attributable to the change in lifestyle brought in by this century.

Web browsers are already filling in the role of "super-apps." I can connect to thousands of services across the planet without leaving the window of my browser. What need will a potential super-app address that the open web can't?

We are screwed*

The article may have an interesting premise, however the only statistics we are offered in support of the author’s claim is two years’ worth of data (2021 and 2022). What about the more long-term trends? We might be missing the big picture for short-term cyclical trends. Also, the data for 2022 is, without doubt, incomplete.

I don’t understand what is so surprising about this. The world has been producing high-quality music for decades. The catalog of old music will always grow in size relative to the catalog of new music. Were we expecting the dominance of old music to decline for no reason?