For any pattern, constant, irrational, etc, in math, there exists a set of formulas that models it up until n. It still is a cool little Riemann sum in this paper

I'm not convinced that functional programming will grow in terms of devs using it daily, but it has been very useful for myself in certain contexts (especially when I wrote math based libraries using permutations, heavy recursion, etc). The results of this seminar are awesome!

Ok, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.

As a potential college dropout looking to publish my CS research, this is an extremely helpful thread. Thanks everyone for your contributions!

This is exactly why I started the thread: I dropped out of college a couple years ago as I had opportunities that a degree could not offer me (I still believe this was the good choice). But as I move forward and do more and more RnD at work, in my startup and as a hobby, I would like to share some pieces of information to the world.

All I would advise you is to embrace the unknown and strive to learn more everyday.

Whichever path you chose, I wish you good luck.

The speed of computers has scaled / is scaling so quickly. IMO avoiding JS completely is ridiculous.

JS doesn't just incur a bandwidth cost, you have parse time and then the hit on your users framerate when you naively fiddle with the DOM or override the scrolling behaviour.

One word... bitcoin!

This is a great example of why AI innovation is not moving at the pace we are told to believe. This is using the same basic algorithms we've known about for decades, just more compute and differently formulated problems. We need a paradigm shift!

Immense oligopoly on its way

Seems like SpaceX is a light year beyond these guys. Do they just get coverage because they're a private space corp?

SpaceX is light years beyond what they are doing right now.

--but--

Jeff Bezos has said he plans on spending $1 Billion/year on blue origin.

Unlike SpaceX, they don't need to actually worry about money.

To put in perspective how much money Jeff Bezos has (and he is somebody who really want to do space travel): he could privately fund a manned mission to mars and still remain the richest man in the world.

It's just incomprehensible the resources that they have there. Blue O will almost definitely catch SpaceX.

He might as well spend $10B a year, results will be the same. Time is money, but money isn't time.

Bezos frequently speaks about efficiency of deploying capital. My guess is he doesn't believe he would get 10x results from 10x investment.

I'm sure that there is some speedup when he starts spending more than $1 billion. Given that his net worth reached $150 billion it seems like it's safe to go to $2 billion/year without running out of money during his lifetime.

Blue Origin is more of a wild card than SpaceX - because they have Bezos backing them with his endless bank account, they don't have to release products day-to-day like SpaceX does to fund their more ambitious plans. This also means that the public doesn't get much in the way of feedback on how well BO's development efforts are going.

For the press, that means that it's really hard to judge whether BO's vehicles are vaporware or not, which fuels endless speculation. I personally happen to think that SpaceX's "ship something today" situation is good for their development process, but that may just be my software experience showing.

Releasing often does make the release process more polished...

In a recent interview Bezos said paraphrasing, it's pointless to go to Mars.

So really there is no comparison since the main goal of Musk/SpaceX everything it does seems to be making the technology to get to Mars.

Did you miss the part where his goal is to have millions of people living and working in space, both in orbit and on the moon? Bezos certainly has a vision, it's just a different one than Musk's.

That and it's run by Jeff Bezos, who has the money to do this for the long haul.