/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14876150
Woah. Computing stuff is cool. I will try make an algorithm that filters some useless computations. For example on a 100x100 grid, if you only drew one black pixel, that's not a maid so there is no reason to search those images for maids.

If you drew 9,999 black pixels and only one white one there is no reason to search there either.

So somewhere there is both a minimum and maximum number of pixels which can be in a maid.

We can sharpen our maidseach algorithm by determining which sets of data can be ignored instead of computed. It may not be possible to get exact rules and I would rather err on the side of computing too much stuff than risk missing any maids. We can definitely eliminate some computations though.

>>14866577
Maid Books.

>>14866011
>no science maids
I'm sorry anon. It's hard to read papers that aren't formatted right. If you want, I can reformat it. If you want some specific maids, please post them. If not, I have a large collection of anime maids.

>>14863128
You don't know what an ad hominem is. I didn't attack you or even address you. I addressed the inadequate formatting you use in your papers.

The very first line of your rebuttals is obviously wrong for as long as you refuse to use science maids.

I don't know why you're committed to being wrong on this. I'd be happy to give you the latex code to properly format your papers.

>>14861630
I guess my problem with this (other than it appearing to be silly on it's face) is that some of this is easily testable, so why not just test it?

I could generate a billion random numbers right now while you think really hard about wanting high rolls or low rolls or think about nothing as a control and we can actually record and measure some results.

A program which generates random numbers can be constructed in many languages, for free. Computers are cheap and you thinking about higher or lower numbers is free.

There is literally no excuse not to try to reproduce the experiment as it requires no funding or special equipment. I would do it just to answer silly questions like if Java is more resistant to psychic meddling than Fortran 90.

>>14853643
What kind of science does he do? If he is a physicist there is a good chance I won't understand him. The only reason I have a chance with Rubin Landau is because I am good at Java and this Landau translated all his ideas to Java. His "physics" book is really a programming book in disguise.

Java is my strongest normie language, so I use it every time I want to prototype something or try something new. His book being Java based was just dumb luck. The coding style is very academic, (I don't mean academic in a derogatory way. More like noting some out of date style choices such as using meaningless single letter variable names all over the place as a habitual holdover from a time you might've been stuck on a 80 character wide display) but it's still readable.

>>14853729
What book is this from?

>>14853527
Some of them probably. Other just buy second-hand. Others looked too hard for now.

The reason I do well with computer stuff is because if people want me to solve their computer problem, they have to explain it in very simple terms. Computer Science is also a field that got blessed with lots of good writers, so it is easy to just read the books.

I can get an ELI5 type explanation that's good enough to write code from and I will do so because I enjoy it. This frees the scientist who played science with me from having to do the computer part.

Probably a guy who is doing physics just wants to know the answer of some physics problem. He doesn't want to have to care what a thread is or what a garbage collector is. He doesn't want to care about how fast file IO or printing to the screen is. He doesn't want to have to care about how to tell a computer to do an integral in Fortran 77. It's unrelated to the type of science he wants to play with. He wants to think about his physics niche and the material need for a fast computer program got in the way. I have the opposite interest. I don't care what physics is doing. I don't even know how to think about a physics problem. I want to make the computer do something interesting, preferably in either a language I made up, or an old one like Fortran or Oberon or something.

It's like when you were a kid and you played Power Rangers with other kids. You all picked different colors. Everybody did a different thing, but you were all on the same team. I wanna be the green one, and being willing to collect and read six-dozen books on effectively dead computer languages is my Dragonzord summoning flute. There are a lot of programmers/computer scientists who are way at it than me, but almost none of them care about anything that happened with computers before like, 2010. Let alone things that happened in the 70s or 80s. The best Python programmer you know has probably never heard of Modula-2 or APL.