niplav @niplav@schelling.pt
- Website
- https://niplav.site/index.html
- Pronouns
- they/them
I operate by Crocker's rules[1].
Joined Aug 2021
Back from 𝕏
The good thing about niplav is that he just isn't that smart
Europe is performing autoerotic asphyxiation on a civilizational level
Today I learned that some people use ℘ to represent the powerset.
Today was a good day, but that was a mediocre and disappointing move on humanity's part
"Space-Value Taxation under the Kerr-Newman Metric"
Positive update on effective altruists: I thought they wouldn't be able to update from technical AI alignment as a most important cause to a new cause X. It seems like that cause X is AI governance and the vibe shifted towards it.
Congrats! You've exceeded my expectations.
Oh cool we doing surreal consequentialism now?
Supervolution
I haven't thouhht about the game theory of it though
Alternative view: holidays just like dropout and makes orgs more robust
It is possible to get more detailed information on employee performance by looking at semi-random holidays:
If their job is still ~getting done (or the department output isn't suffering much), then they're either not working very much or their job can be taken over by coworkers
niplav
boosted
If I were constructing a system I would simply define each element, relationship, and process with rigor.
niplav
boosted
أعمل حاليا على دعم المعادلات الرياضياتية العربية في ليبرأوفيس، النتائج مبشرة حتى الآن.
Buying 4 Nvidia shares two years ago, and 2 more a year ago, was a really good move on my part
QA sessions and office hours are mostly dependant on the quality of questions
niplav
boosted
Tryonics
niplav
boosted
The number of groups with n elements goes like this, starting with n = 0:
0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 5, ...
The number of semigroups with n elements goes like this:
1, 1, 5, 24, 188, 1915, 28634, 1627672, 3684030417, 105978177936292, ...
Here I'm counting isomorphic guys as the same.
Is there any sort of algebraic gadget where the number of them with n elements goes like this?
1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, ...
No!
Not if by "algebraic gadget" we mean a thing defined to have finitely many operations which are required to obey finitely many equational laws.
(Of course one can build other operations from the finitely many given, and also derive more equations from those given.)
Apparently this follows from a result of László Lovász in 1967:
https://mathoverflow.net/q/454146/2893
The sequence I showed you has a(2²) < a(2). But he seems to have showed that if a(n) is the number of algebraic gadgets with n elements, we must have
a(n²) ≥ a(n)
because if A and B are two gadgets with A² ≅ B², then A ≅ B.
I say "apparently" and "seems" because the one paper by him on this stuff is hard for me to read. But this result sure seems nice! Does it become obvious if you look at it the right way? Like, with some category theory?
"my timelines have shortened a lot" — beginner brag
"my timelines haven't changed since mid 2020" — intermediate brag
Trying to track & reportreality — advamced brag
- Website
- https://niplav.site/index.html
- Pronouns
- they/them
I operate by Crocker's rules[1].
Joined Aug 2021
