carver

What a great seminar, that was. I really appreciated his advice on writing recommendation letters, too: the expectation is shifted wildly towards effusive. If you are plainly complimentary, it can come off as a secret warning that you don't think they are worth hiring.

But there were also great AI papers, and meta advice on reading them efficiently. (I don't remember any crimes against ferrets, but presumably the reading list changed over time)

I appreciated that class, and it's only grown on me over time. Another line that really stuck with me was something like "forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit" (Which I remembered as "Perhaps we will look back on even this with fondness") It's so easy to undervalue amazing things when they are happening to you. I was really convinced that I was appreciating it, even more than many around me. But I still look back and think I could have soaked it in, even more.

Ahah! I see it now, thanks.

Fascinating. Thanks for the clue. It's the most complete blank for me of all the tests. I looked up the reference image, but still cannot see it in figure 2G. I can't even guess at where the eyes/nose/mouth are in the clouds.

I don't buy that the reversion to income tax should happen on high percentage gains if the absolute gains are low. I think the tax could be made even more progressive. Something like:

The first $500k of capital gains get current cap gains treatment. After that, all gains are taxed as regular additional income.

Based on context, you seem to be referring to gas when you say 12 million "ether gwei" (the block limit being 12 million gas, lately). But gas is its own unit, not measured in ether (or in wei, the smallest atomic unit of ether).

The reason the math still works is that 12 million gas priced at 1 gwei/gas would cost 12 million gwei, which is .012 ether. (Since one ether is defined as a billion billion wei) ... Maybe this was all what you meant, but it was hard for me to decipher.

Yeah, digital-only NFTs will likely be a fad. I'll be interested again when the trend moves toward deeds. A title for a physical work could have staying power. Even potentially an iou from an artist for a one of a kind (physical) piece.

> Hypothesis is pretty smart to find edge cases that you usually don't think of.

This is worth reemphasizing.

For certain kinds of hard problems, I've found it really valuable for building confidence in an implementation.

If you happen to have a reference implementation, with a small surface API, it can be a very fast way to write tests: tell hypothesis to input anything it wants and validate that both libraries produce the same result. It's not magic, you will probably still have to give hints about how to build interesting inputs, but still a very quick way to get a lot of coverage. (Also be sure to crank up the number of examples to build more confidence, 100 is often not enough to really explore an input space).

Tail call optimization is appealing. Sometimes recursion is the cleanest implementation, but call depth is not known up front.

RIP Pat Winston - he infuriated me the most when he said something so obviously true and which I wanted to be false. One example: "No one will ever read your paper in entirety, so write for the skimmers." As much as I loved his technical lectures, I especially remembered his peripheral aphorisms.

But he said one thing that I immediately agreed with (conceptually) and have recalled at many hard times in my life: "Perhaps we will look back on even this with fondness." (But in Latin, because Pat Winston)

`if re.match(p1, line) as m`, maybe?