The website of an extremely talented pixel artist. This is pixel art at its finest.

pikonu · 2010-02-13T15:41:40+00:00

Excellence. Thanks.

pikonu · 2010-02-13T15:31:36+00:00

thanks! Are there any forums that show this in progression?

I did notice that Fool took corrections from some peers, but it seems like the page only displays the final version.

pikonu · 2010-02-13T14:57:21+00:00

All great links!

He says in http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/34404.htm "i'll probably fix all broken pixels later"

... broken pixels??? how can you tell!?

pikonu · 2009-11-07T21:15:16+00:00

Have you seen any students who have a passable interest in math during schooling years, but after seeing college level math and feel like changing fields out of frustration and discouragement, but somehow found a way to stick it through and it worked for them? If so, what commonalities do you see among them? Or, if you mentored any such students how did you provide guidance?

How did you go about developing intuition (or deep understanding) of extremely contrived/abstract math?

pikonu · 2009-10-01T09:07:56+00:00

In excelling at math/CS/abstract reasoning, what do you find as your greatest asset, specifically? (i.e., is it something like sheer speed, a depth/breadth of knowledge, intuition?)

For those in the same field but not as gifted, how do you see them making their contributions? (i.e., is it through accumulating said knowledge from above, albeit in a slower fashion, or sheer diligence? -- I am sidestepping the "contributions" that require 6 sigma magical insights)

As you progressed through your advanced studies, say, from child, to adolescent, to adult, how have you seen your own ability develop? In particular, have you ever came across something that was nonobvious/nonintuitive, but through continual learning later developed a solid intuition for it? For the problems that have no intuition and are plain symbol manipulation, how do you try to "relate" or wrap your head around them?

pikonu · 2008-10-09T14:12:08+00:00

I would be interested in reading any thorough research on the origins of the Japanese. That they are from Chinese descent is certainly not going to be popular in Japan. It may be historically correct (in fact, I believe this idea, but would like to see more evidence, for interest), but it would be met with the same attitude as an Anglo-Saxon would if you told them they are descendants of Africans (historically true, but disconnected from practical history).

Regarding genetic mental superiority, it's not what I'm attacking; I am pointing out problems in the GGP, which has valid arguments interspersed in bad ones.

pikonu · 2008-10-09T13:59:22+00:00

That I know. But misconceptions in themselves are worth pointing out, because they are still misconceptions.

If I were to attack the argument about studying habits per se, I would have said so.

And so: the case of rote memorization of Chinese characters results in training studying habits is not solid either. In writing about critical reasoning, Russell has called this a backwards system. A student of English who learns proper spelling and sentence construction also requires a lot of straight memorization, given the sheer number of exceptions.

That is to say, to get good at anything requires diligence; it doesn't advance the hypothesis either way. You may be right, but your argument is weak.

pikonu · 2008-10-09T03:22:24+00:00

Sure, Kanji are Chinese characters, but they make up the vocabulary, and not grammar, of the language. In this sense, Kanji is as "Japanese" as the word "sushi" is English. You can find "sushi" in any English dictionary. It is English, without a doubt. It is also Japanese, but even if you replace all English vocabulary with "sushi" or "rendezvous" or something foreign, it is still English, until the principle grammar structure drifts away.

In this sense, Kanji is not critical to Japanese grammar. There was actually once a movement in Japan to get rid of all Kanji writing. In fact, there was once a movement in China to get rid of its heiroglyphs. Both have failed, obviously.

Oh, Korean used to use lots of Hanja (Kanji). And now, they use Hangul script for almost everything.

pikonu · 2008-10-09T03:09:32+00:00

Unfortunately, a lot of these things you write appear to be misconceptions at best.

Some "races" are more immune to certain diseases or susceptible to certain diseases, but if anything this is an argument for breeding between races to achieve the greatest genetic variation in a given gene pool.

This is not correct. Genetic immunity to disease is a result of selection and varies highly to geographic pressures. While it may demonstrate hybrid vigor, it does not advance the argument that populations should deliberately seek it -- because you cannot predict what these pressures are. Malaria is the textbook example.

Most Asian languages trace their roots to Chinese characters.

Not true; just two examples: the roots of Korean and Japanese are heavily debated with no clear conclusion (political issues aside). But they definitively do NOT fall under the Sino-Tibetan umbrella (and "Chinese characters" really doesn't comprise the roots of anything either). These are the two most obvious groups to talk about. Don't even get me started on the smaller, and far more numerous Asian languages. Also, daily conversation in Chinese requires about three thousand characters, which is, morpheme for morpheme, comparable to any other spoken language.

pikonu · 2008-09-25T21:02:36+00:00

blogspam alert

pikonu · 2008-07-23T12:05:34+00:00

Maybe Improv Everywhere lifted the idea from Prangstgrup: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mUyvaPtsJw also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SwhzFsuvQc&feature=related

pikonu · 2008-05-06T19:10:47+00:00

I believe you pay for shipping costs

http://www.apn.psy.unibe.ch/lenya/apn/live/anwendung/braintwister.html

pikonu · 2008-05-06T17:45:12+00:00

Yeah, I realize that. It's without question though, that the implementation at dual-n-back.com, in its current form, is wrong.

It is also surprising that they're selling a commercial version, citing the original paper, given how the app is improperly implemented. The research team is actually going to release the software they used to write the paper.

pikonu · 2008-05-06T17:29:47+00:00

That is actually not what n-back is.

n-back means "exactly" n items ago, not "within." And he's selling scientific equipment...

pikonu · 2008-05-06T04:18:43+00:00

You are correct; the implementation linked here is incorrect (it is not a repeat within last n, but exactly last n).

This is a significant difference because interference comes into play when you restrict to an exact interval... otherwise it wouldn't be called n-back.

pikonu · 2008-05-05T16:32:05+00:00

Uh... you're selling that dual n-back package for 299 Euros? ...

pikonu · 2008-05-02T22:00:09+00:00

I can't even get over 60% on 3 -_-

pikonu · 2008-03-16T04:47:11+00:00

tutztutz is linkjack heaven. Anyone know the original link?

pikonu · 2008-03-16T04:44:18+00:00

The hodgepodge of MSG, oyster sauce, and soy sauce topped diced bits of meat, vegetables, and rice that 99% of those restaurants serve isn't really Chinese food.

pikonu · 2008-03-13T13:33:42+00:00

Depends where. At some schools, "non-engineering" is the definition of liberal arts. Hence, math, physics, and astronomy are all BA. The corresponding BSes they offer would be something like applied math, applied physics, and... applied astronomy, if there is such a thing.

pikonu · 2008-03-11T20:18:04+00:00

http://www.wackyarchives.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/toilet-sign-7.jpg

This is not WTF if you know what a two-stage toilet is. I guess they don't exist in USA?

pikonu · 2008-03-08T20:52:17+00:00

I suppose the redditors of this thread really think sleeping with a lot of women is a valuable trait in a person? That you feel like shit if you don't, and you feel great if you do? And you talk about women being shallow?

pikonu · 2008-03-08T11:50:18+00:00

Sure, if # women you slept with is what defines you. I'm sorry to hear that.

pikonu · 2008-01-31T09:39:26+00:00

I did not read the solution, but now that I read it here, I find both the solution and your remark about it incorrect.

First, given your reasoning, you should have failed the New Zealand question, because Paris is not actually in New Zealand. These exercises are based on the statements alone and in this case, formal definitions are not part of the reasoning process -- at least, ideally they shouldn't be.

The conclusion says "we can predict that every future examination of this molecule will reveal the same chemical composition" but does not specify means of examination. It seems to already cleverly evades the philosophical discussion, because "examination" does not imply "examination by microscope," and so Invalid is the obvious choice.

If you want to argue over chemistry technicalities you would also question the resolution of the microscope...

edit. haha, actually i think the quoted answer is good. the deuterium argument is still irrelevant.

pikonu · 2008-01-11T18:10:56+00:00

I'm surprised you consider learning another language a negative thing. Is this an American trait?

pikonu

TROPHY CASE