danilor

I'm wondering what are the considerations for having multiple detectors instead of a single large one! Does anybody have an idea? is it just because it's easier?

Cool!

I wonder how different those are to real simulations! Do they treat electrons as point-like, or it's all computation on the fields?

I wanted to know as well! The resources I found, though, don't mention anything about what is the safety precautions one should take about the dust generated in the process. What masks to use and such. I understand everything should be done wet, but I wanted to know, for example, if one should wear a mask when polishing with cerium oxide even when wet. Maybe I'm being too cautions of this? I do fear what I don't understand! It's hard to make decisions without numbers. If anyone has any info on this please let me know! :)

I got stuck on 7/8 for a good while because I learned the rules wrong. I thought every bracket square needed to be lit.

I couldn't figure if this was published to a journal? Or is it only published to a pre-print server?

This is so nice!!

I'm wondering how hard would it be to extend it to include the whole game state plus all the ROM into the plane at the same time, and have it compute the next step from that!

I'll bring to your attention footnote 1, where author links to an article seemingly arguing against the 'expanding circle'. I haven't read such article nor do I know anything about circles, but I thought you'd like to know it is there.

Great article! You can tell the author is frustrated while the tone being quite considering.

I found the part on self-handicapping a bit strange, though. Is that idea real, measurable psychology, or is it more of an interpretation of behavior? I find it hard to conceive how to properly measure such "unconscious intentions". Maybe I misunderstood the author and they only meant it as an analogy.

I feel like there's more to explore on understanding why people think the world is so doomed. My impression is that those convictions are formed from being blasted with news, and not by looking at data. Are there papers out about this?

Another perspective I'd find interesting to learn about is why is it that people that believe problems are solvable do/do not take action themselves. Could the reason behind the decisions be incredibly multifaceted, or could it correlate strongly with, say, personality traits and age?

As I wrote the paragraph above, I came to realize I don't how to create a study that is able to measure a causation/correlation that only exist when two variables interact. Like when a correlation with X only exists if variables A and B are "high" at the same time, not independently. My first thought is that it's a really difficult analysis to make because there are so many possible combinations and thus many opportunities for things to correlate by chance. I'd be happy to hear if you know how to do analysis as such.

  Location: Rio, Brazil
  Remote: Yes
  Willing to relocate: Yes
  Technologies: c, c++, python, javascript, gcp, aws, docker/podman. currently learning: rust, commonlisp, ruby on rails
  Résumé/CV: https://gist.github.com/returnDanilo/bf48575234aa0a7a05f69cd1e231668a
  Email: returndanilo at gmail

Specially interested if you have commonlisp in your tech stack, as it's been a point of interest of mine for a while :)

I remember being so blown away by this. I'd go to people with a laptop and say 'do you see this picture of this person??' -- 'no!! this person doesn't exist! it's not a real person!'

I appreciate this as someone learning lisp for the first time!

While I'm here I'll ask: does anybody have a recommendation for resources on learning lisp that focus on how the interpreter/compiler works? Here's what I tried so far: 1) Started Practical Common Lisp, but I found it lacking in the specifics. Then I 2) tried going to the specification but that was way too much. Then I 3) tried Common Lisp The Language and, while I liked the precise definitions a lot, it was a lot to keep in mind at the same time as learning the fundamentals. Right now I'm 4) back at Practical Common Lisp, skipping most of the text and reading surrounding paragraphs whenever if I find a piece of code I don't understand.

I wanted something that will not explain the standard library; I'd rather read the documentation for that. I wanted to know more precisely what happens throughout the program's life: Like, is behavior when running a script in "interpreter" mode guaranteed to be the same as when running in "native compiled code"? At what point does the compiler create an intermediate representation? Why does SBCL not use LLVM? At what point are #-starting words(read macros?) evaluated and how is that different from interpreting to compiling. How do I control the amount of optimization the compiler will do? Will the interpreter ever try to optimize? Is garbage collection implementation-defined? How will implementations change in behavior?