morokhovets

> There's nothing else to it.

Your response seems too generalized as if it relates to everyone. Let me disagree.

I myself can be considered that kind of genius OP is talking about, at least in my earlier days. First 15 years of my career I've never had any (ANY) savings, and most of the time had some amount of debt. But I always felt simple enough to walk away from any situation I don't want to be in and was ready to live in any condition. But I always loved my job, always was super-curious and eager to learn, and employers were always looking for me not the other way around.

I can say that OP is right, at least for some subset of people.

> On what basis are you claiming that all number systems are fundamentally two-dimensional, and not one-dimensional, three-dimensional, or some other dimension?

I never said anything like this. I was talking about complex numbers only.

I suggest to stop here, we are talking about two different things. But, if anything, there is a comment in this thread by adrian_b which explains what I mean in more detail.

That's exactly what I was trying to convey, thanks.

I agree with you here, but I don't agree on downplaying complex numbers to be just a base vector and orthogonal.

If we take a matrix representation of a complex number it is usually done as a 2x2 matrix of very specific structure. I completely agree that it is easier to work with. But looking at them this way misses very important place of them in the grand scheme of things.

Complex numbers are actually what real numbers really ARE under the hood, we just aren't taught to think this way. 'i' is what real numbers miss to be completed. And you don't need 'j's, 'k's and others.

If your point is that introducing 'i' above traditional real numbers syntax is ugly - I completely agree.

> For all practical purposes, complex numbers represent a two-dimensional system

Yet operations on complex numbers are not the same as operations on vectors on simple two-dimensional plane. This is my point.

To give a simple example - Mandelbrot set is a direct consequence of amazing properties of complex numbers and has nothing to do with two dimension.

Well, it looks great in two dimensions

I cannot agree with calling complex numbers just two dimensional.

Function of a complex variable is very different from a function of two variables. You can say these are two different departments of mathematics.

Real numbers are not algebraically complete, but extending it with 'i' makes it complete. Adding another dimension to go to 'two dimensions' does not do anything like this.

Mathematicians are fascinated with complex numbers because it is THE extension of real numbers that completes them in very important sense but it comes with so many unexpected and fascinating properties.

Quantum phase is not two-dimensional, it is complex and it amazes me much much more than two-dimensionality would.

I am using Youtube (with Premium) and HN. Almost no other sites, only as links from HN. So here am I - not using adblock and not seeing lots of ads either.

I misinterpreted your comment. Thought you were talking of SSR pattern in general.

Crawlers will see loading indicators instead of content. This is not what you want if you want your content indexed.

> mostly his music doesn't do much emotionally

Couldn't agree less. I am so moved by at least half of his stuff. Try "Lua" or "Feel" from Djesse vol2 or even "In the real early morning" from his first album. The OP article is talking about "lack of collaborating with other people" - but it is opposite to reality. Most of his later work is collaborations with a lot of brilliant musicians.

Next step, be at home with eyes opened

Anarki in quake champions can move pretty fast. No single player though.

Or maybe ensureAccountLocked('user')?