normalhuman

Come on now, don't be disingenuous. Of course they are mutually exclusive, because you mean "not being reddit" as in "we are better than reddit" -- an elitist stance.

> When I see comments criticizing others' comments I am always reminded of reddit. I think this is exactly what you're hoping to avoid when you come to HN.

> I don't think HN is going to become a better place by becoming more elitist.

err...

> This seems extremely pedantic. "Use case" as it's used today basically just means "case" or "situation" for a particular project or task or goal. It's not business jargon or a buzzword term, even if perhaps it started off that way many decades ago.

Notice that you are already in contradiction with the first criticism that I received in this thread, where a subtle difference in meaning was proposed.

> it means "in the future", which is ambiguous, but it's no more ambiguous than saying "in the future",

The main point is that it is totally unnecessary, we already have the future tense to talk about what will happen in the future.

The same applies here. Remove the phrase with "use case" and you get exactly the same meaning, with less words and less cringe.

> You're picking much too fine a nit here.

I think you feel that way because of the HN/tech echo chamber. Nobody says or feels the need to say "use case" outside of such circles.

> But if if this is a hard-stop item for you at this juncture, then we should circle back... I'm sure we can align on this going forward. ;)

Hehe ;)

> HN has a history of comments like this that criticize other comments and add nothing to the discussion

I disagree. HN is a place that seems to pride itself on the quality of its discussions, and on a higher intellectual caliber when compared to other Internet discussion venues. Surely a good command of language is part of that?

> This is what happens when incentives are not aligned with regulations.

No, this is what happens when one leaves the fox guarding the hen house.

If incentives were aligned with regulations, there would be no need for regulations to begin with.

> Why are you so bitter?

I don't know, it's just how I am.

> I doubt PhD+ people do that type of research "just for fun"

Well you'd be surprised. All the professional mathematicians I know do math for its own sake. Some amateurs also do it "just for fun", as you say.

> Someone answered elaborately, and I'm glad they did. Thanks anyway.

A bigger person than me, especially considering the tone of your question.

> Yeah but now, what?

"now, what?", what?

> What was learned from this?

That 42 is the sum of three cubes.

> Why did we look for a solution in the first place?

They did. I do not believe that you were involved.

> How is it important that a number can be a sum of three cubes?

People like things for their own sake. How is it important to have sex or drink a beer? Same thing. Also math has this uncanny tendency to turn out to be useful where you least expect it. Consider the primes. For a long time people might have asked the same question you are asking here, and yet now they are central in encryption and thus the digital finance market. Could not find a more capitalistic and materialistic use if you tried.