There's a story about this spiral way of writing the whole numbers. I think it's called "the Ulam spiral" after a guy called Stanislaw Ulam who was sitting a math lecture one day, and it was a bit boring, so he wasn't really listening. He just started with your first spiral of the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,... going around the central point and spiraling outwards. Then he shaded in the prime numbers and he noticed something, which is that there were several diagonal lines on a kind of diamond-shaped grid pattern, which had far more primes on them than all the others. So he wrote down a recursive formula for those lines and they allowed him to find a lot of prime numbers very quickly, because the prime numbers were more dense on those lines than they are on the number line. Check "Ulam spiral" on Wikipedia to see some computer drawings. There's also a version with a triangular spiral with vertical lines of primes that was discovered earlier. And there are hexagonal ones too.
He's fed up with talking about this. I used to have a copy of the little book he wrote called Minds, Brains & Science. Apparently the AI at Google has read it too and gets it completely: How does stuff like this happen? Most people won't even notice what I'm saying even if I point out that the Google search changed the title. The book was really called Minds, Brains & Science , not Minds, Brains & Programs . (But maybe that was a later edition or something?) I asked Google and it said: John Searle's book Minds, Brains and Science did not become "Minds, Brains & Programs"—rather, they are two separate, distinct works published a few years apart: "Minds, Brains, and Programs" (1980): A landmark academic paper published in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences. This is where Searle first introduced his famous Chinese Room Argument to challenge the concept of "strong AI". "Minds, Brains and Science" (1984): A shor...
Listening to Freya Holmér last night I started to get glimmers of an idea I had long ago about how to represent vector spaces in computational processes using this recursive abstract type : abstype 'a point = POINT of {getx : 'a vector, diff : 'a point -> 'a point, move : 'a point -> 'a point, scale : 'a -> 'a point, proj : 'a point -> 'a} with fun new i (op +) (op -) (op * ) dot = let fun self x = POINT {getx = x, move = fn (POINT pr) => (self (x + (#getx pr))), diff = fn (POINT pr) => self (x - (#getx pr)), scale = fn i => (self (x * i)), proj = fn (POINT pr) => ...
I think this is the first time they've actually publicly announced anything about this project. See these posts: Eron Woolf on Why Open Source is Failing Matt Mikhailov and Vincent McKibbon on The Problem with Open Hardware Jason Kridner talking About BeagleBoard.org and Software Development . See these places: https://danielc.dev/rk/ https://github.com/petabyt/rk https://github.com/futo-org/ret See also https://pine64.org/devices/pinebook_pro/ . Subscribe to FUTO . See https://github.com/nir9/low-level-learning-resources/tree/master/setups/debian . Subscribe to Nir Lichtman . If you're looking for a cool init process, try https://ctx.graphics/terminal/ . See Artful Bytes - When to Use a RTOS and How to Create a Successful Open Source Project .
Comments
Post a Comment