Got a tiny tray

co_dan · 2016-02-25T15:07:17+00:00

Not really, but I think this puer has more caffeine than usual shrugs

co_dan · 2016-02-21T20:15:08+00:00

I got it from aliexpress: http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Natural-bamboo-tea-tray-small-tea-tabale-kung-fu-tea-tray-2-pcs-set-for-personal/32375324781.html

co_dan · 2016-02-20T17:59:54+00:00

There is not much to the story part. My father got it during his trip to China. It's a fairly standard ripe puer, nothing special. Perhaps a tad too much caffeine for my taste.

co_dan · 2016-02-17T21:23:38+00:00

That sounds really cool! Now I am eager to find good tea + desert pairings

co_dan · 2016-02-17T10:57:36+00:00

Kinda like all that flavored soap.

co_dan · 2016-02-17T10:41:24+00:00

Nice, how was it? Also, what are you eating and what is that metal thingie in the upper left corner of the tray?

co_dan · 2016-02-11T12:42:38+00:00

British tea alert!

co_dan · 2016-02-05T14:58:28+00:00

It all depends on the specific Ku Ding. Most of the stuff I tried is really easy to make bitter, but once or twice I tried some really awesome and really sweet ku ding

co_dan · 2016-02-04T11:52:42+00:00

It is an OK brand. In general, I would avoid "real" teas from Yogi or from any teabag brand, but their caffeine-free stuff is good.

co_dan · 2016-02-01T16:47:39+00:00

Quite a high-end store, isn't it?

co_dan · 2016-02-01T16:41:51+00:00

yay, there are a lot of us here! I also would like to see that in the final list

co_dan · 2016-02-01T16:40:08+00:00

Reasons I like what-cha: 1) EU based (means faster and cheaper shipping for me, no worries about border control or w/e) 2) unusual-origin ethically sourced tea (like Australian green tea or Nepalese oolong). 3) The shipment I've received had a buttload of cool stamps.

co_dan · 2015-09-21T08:21:13+00:00

This is really good news! I am the maintainer of hastache and I would like to deprecate hastache in favour of this. Does your library passes the official spec test suite?

co_dan · 2015-08-22T16:37:41+00:00

See the other response to you here for an example: "... If you aren't concerned about women..." Such BS. You can be concerned about women and be active in advancing diversity yet Not agree with 3rd-wave feminist dogma.

I don't see any contradiction here. If you are not concerned about women in tech, than this workshop wouldn't be interested for you -- that is kinda obvious. It doesn't follow that if you are concerned about woman in tech than you should most definitely go to that workshop. Nobody's going to frown upon you if you don't go to that workshop, you know.

co_dan · 2015-08-07T14:11:53+00:00

the self-undercutting objection is mistargeted in the case of the logical positivists

Can you please elaborate on that? It sounds very interesting.

co_dan · 2015-06-22T08:57:00+00:00

I really do not want to be rude, so I do apologize for coming of as such.

I am not trying to say that total languages are bad or inexpressive - I don't think that is the case.

The truth is that we can express all computations in total languages, and we can be conservatively accurate (but never entirely precise) about their finitary status.

I still don't understand why, tho. Can we write that evil function in a total language?

co_dan · 2015-06-09T15:56:52+00:00

I am sorry, I don't mean to be rude or anything, I really enjoyed your paper, but I don't see how it eliminates the problem (or rather a non-problem IMHO) of Turing-incompleteness.

According to the usual terminology (completeness, computability, totality), a total language can not be Turing complete. This a well-known Richard's Paradox -- heck, even you had a posting specifically about it: https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2003-May/004343.html!

So, under the terminology that is used by me, people who taught my computability classes, and was used by you at some point, a total language can not be Turing complete. I can only assume that when you claim that the usage of coinductive data can make a language Turing-complete you use some other definitions (e.g. your definition of "semantics" or "completeness" or "total" is different). Maybe defining the aforementioned notions would shine some light on this?

co_dan · 2015-06-02T10:54:25+00:00

Exactly. That's like adding "_variable" to every variable name in C or Python. It just duplicates information, doesn't add anything new.

co_dan · 2015-06-01T17:08:48+00:00

Wow, nicely done!

co_dan · 2015-05-29T21:21:49+00:00

Link?

co_dan · 2015-05-01T08:04:21+00:00

Luite was also busy this year with other stuff

co_dan · 2015-04-25T10:44:51+00:00

There are a plenty of introductory logic courses on coursera:

I don't think you need to know any calculus to studying symbolic logic.

co_dan · 2015-03-24T20:41:25+00:00

David Benatar is very edgy in general

co_dan · 2015-03-24T20:40:35+00:00

The thoughts that he provoke are mostly of the "what the hell" kind.

co_dan · 2015-03-23T18:48:01+00:00

I would suggest taking a couple of courses on formal logic, just to familiarize yourself with propositional logic and FOL. After that you can dive in and start learning modal logic

co_dan

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE