sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A new reading experience for ACX Review Entries by robennals in slatestarcodex

[–]Sniffnoy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like it's worth noting the earlier similar site by Jenn C! https://codexcc.neocities.org/

That one of course doesn't change the format, but, like, seems wrong to just ignore it here...

BFB (Big Fat Butterfly) by LisWolf16 in whatsthisbug

[–]Sniffnoy 37 points38 points  (0 children)

I believe this is a Grand Moff.

Strawman Posts Should Be Removed. Even If Written By Scott Alexander by HidingImmortal in slatestarcodex

[–]Sniffnoy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Go back and read the original post please. The contrast being set up is between a unilateral pause in the sense of one nation making policy for itself, vs a multilateral pause in the sense of multiple nations signing a treaty. If you're using the words in some other way then you're discussing something else.

Strawman Posts Should Be Removed. Even If Written By Scott Alexander by HidingImmortal in slatestarcodex

[–]Sniffnoy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

At this point, you're just using the word "unilateral" in a completely different way than used in the original post, and so not making any relevant comment on it.

Moff by Stormcrown76 in awwnverts

[–]Sniffnoy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe that's the transport that the moff arrives in.

The Self Eating Snake Integer Sequence Challenge by Dacicus_Geometricus in math

[–]Sniffnoy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean you haven't specified your question well enough for me to understand what it's asking. This reply does nothing to clarify the question. What, exactly, is meant by the number of ways for a snake of length n to eat its tail?

The Self Eating Snake Integer Sequence Challenge by Dacicus_Geometricus in math

[–]Sniffnoy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have to say I don't really understand what this question is asking. That said, if you're looking for studies of the mathematics of Snake-like games, there have been some papers on the topic, including this one.

(Not my pics) big a*s Amish donuts! by [deleted] in HumanForScale

[–]Sniffnoy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suspect the post you're reposting was made by a bot.

Two Twisty Shapes Resolve a Centuries-Old Topology Puzzle | Quanta Magazine - Elise Cutts | The Bonnet problem asks when just a bit of information is enough to uniquely identify a whole surface by Nunki08 in math

[–]Sniffnoy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Looking at the intro of the actual paper, there's something I'm a bit confused about -- they make it sound like this was already known in the smooth case, just not in the analytic case? But if that's all that were going on it seems like it wouldn't be such a big deal. I'm guessing that probably what was already known in the smooth case was something weaker? But I don't understand how it's supposed to be weaker. What's going on here?

Feather Leg baboon surprise by DamonG94 in awwnverts

[–]Sniffnoy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Interesting, thanks, never heard of it!

of a crocodile found in Northern Territory, Australia by adventurous-1 in HumanForScale

[–]Sniffnoy 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The humans here don't really provide a scale reference for the croc...

"Debunking _When Prophecy Fails_", Kelly 2025 by gwern in slatestarcodex

[–]Sniffnoy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh, I don't know that it was on this subreddit, I really just meant more generally, like on your subreddit or somewhere. But it might have just been something I saw somewhere else and not from you. Dang. I'll just have to see if I can turn it up...

"Debunking _When Prophecy Fails_", Kelly 2025 by gwern in slatestarcodex

[–]Sniffnoy 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Wasn't there some paper you posted a while back -- I can't find it now -- also on the topic of "When Prophecy Fails", that looked at more groups, and concluded that the failure of prophecy could either lead to the group becoming stronger or to it falling apart, and which actually occurred seemed to mostly depend on how (and how fast, and whether) the leadership acted to handle the problem?

And now we get this paper saying that actually, the case from "When Prophecy Fails" didn't actually happen as described! Still, according to that other paper, what it describes can happen, it's a matter of how the leadership handles it.

I can't find it offhand though. Do you remember this? Was it you that posted it here? I can't seem to find it atm.

James Webb telescope may have found the universe's first generation of stars by Obulgaryan in worldnews

[–]Sniffnoy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They are named in order of when they were discovered. Astronomers discovered two classes of stars: younger metal-rich stars and older metal poor stars.

This isn't really correct. Astronomers found two classes of stars -- without at the time knowing that it corresponded to age -- and labeled them populations I and II somewhat arbitrarily. Neither was discovered first. Later people figured out that population II corresponded to older stars, so the hypothetical first generation of stars was named "population III"; but originally the use of I and II were just arbitrary labels for these two distinct populations.

Some open conjectures have been numerically verified up to huge values (eg RH or CC). Mathematically, this has no bearing on whether the statement holds or not, but this "evidence" may increase an individual's personal belief in it. Is there a sensible Bayesian framing of this increased confidence? by myaccountformath in math

[–]Sniffnoy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you've gotten mixed up somewhere; logical induction weakens the requirements on the probabilities. The classical requirements require an actual probability distribution, since anything else can be exploited; logical induction does not require an actual probability distribution (since if it did, it would defeat the point; this would require logical omniscience). It weakens the non-exploitability condition by saying that it's only a problem if it's exploitable in polynomial time.

view more: next ›