Why can't I read it too? Replies act like it was something over-the-top great, yet HN isn't showing it to me?

Which brings us back to the topic: why would anyone use HN when it is not good for its single purpose: sharing text between users? It's not even like a fridge with ads, where an ad is an additional annoyance, but fridge functions still work. HN sucks at its very purpose.

Enable 'showdead' in HN preferences. Clicking a direct link to the comment should work too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46171635

Thanks!

edit: a great read indeed

How are Netflix created contents profitable? I guess Netflix pays shows based on user time spent, and a Netflix show is profitable if users spend time on it, and not on other shows?

AsciiMath makes easy equations read easy.

1 and 2 would be

  1) d/dx e^y = e^y dy/dx = 1
  2) d/dx e^y = d/dx x = 1

edit: edited, first got them wrong

When you render it for proper typesetting, do the parentheses around dy/dx disappear? (Oh, I guess you've removed them in your edit.)

If they do, it seems like an error-prone way to write your math.

If they don't, it seems like it will make your math look terrible.

Supposing that the parentheses aren't necessary, as implied by your edit: how does AsciiMath determine that e^y isn't in the numerator in "e^y dy/dx", or (worse) in the denominator in "d/dx e^y"?

It seems somewhat less noisy than the LaTeX version, but not much; assuming I can insert whitespace harmlessly:

  \frac d{dx}e^y = e^y\frac{dy}{dx} = 1
        d/dx e^y = e^y      dy/dx   = 1

  \frac d{dx}e^y = \frac d{dx}x = 1
        d/dx e^y =       d/dx x = 1

Here is an online renderer and the description: https://asciimath.org/

The rules are basically the same as LaTeX, with saner symbol names, support for fractions, \ is not needed before symbols and () can be used instead of {}.

> Supposing that the parentheses aren't necessary, as implied by your edit: how does AsciiMath determine that e^y isn't in the numerator in "e^y dy/dx"

It seems to me that dx,dy,dz,dt behave like numbers, single letter variables and symbols (probably they are symbols, but not listed for some reason). Just as LaTeX doesn't need {} parentheses for numbers, single letter variables and symbols, AsciiMath allows omitting them too.

So `/` captures a single number/symbol/variable left to it, and that is `dy`. But if there was `du` for example it would only capture u, and you would need to put du between parentheses.

Thanks! It does better than I expected on tricky input like [0, 1/2). It seems like there are a lot of special cases, though. It does indeed remove parentheses from the output in some cases but not others.

Probably figuring out how to write things in AsciiMath is more trouble than copying and pasting them from Wikipedia though. (The alt text on equation images is the LaTeX source preceded with \displaystyle.)

How do you do \bigg(\big((4x + 2)x + 1\big)x - 3\bigg)x + 5 in AsciiMath? (((4x + 2)x + 1)x - 3)x + 5 makes all the parens the same size.

Why would you want to manually set the sizes of parens? I always use \left \right when writing LaTeX (and having to do it is one of the reasons I hate LaTeX math notation).

Because \left( ... \right) doesn't give very readable results in cases like that; all the parens end up the same size.

I think GP only wants to convert images back for users with legacy browsers, not for everyone. So converting 100% of the images needs more compute money than the amount of storage money it saves, but only converting ~1% of the images on-the-fly would be worth it financially.

[deleted]

I don't see how they are any of those things either...

GPL does not mandate upstreaming your drivers.

It mandates making source available for upstreaming, if you are distributing.

That's actually true, if they wanted to distribute a linux compatible driver they had to make it available for anyone to upstream it in the linux kernel.

Probably GPL was indeed a factor that made device makers and hackers to create open source drivers for linux. I am not convinced that it was a major one.

I think overall it's a good habit to go through your proofs again, and remove unnecessary double negations, and make proofs 'more constructive'.

Reductio ad Absurdum makes coming up with proofs easier (you have one more information to use, you can work from both ends of the problem and try to make 2 half long proofs meet, instead of one normal long), but in the end it is often unnecessary, you can remove it, and your proof reads better.

I don't share his view that Generalized Pigeon-hole Principle makes the normal version unnecessary. The normal version is used a lot in the form it is formulated.

That particular content-farm never interacted with me.

Tangentially, we've reached to the point that we can't trust google/internet anymore.

When I was toying with Haskell I was unable to get GHCi to interpret multiline definitions (Haskell is declarative, which means you don't make commands, but you declare commands which then get executed).

Jupyter+conda/anaconda is almost always not installable and broken for most of its kernels (it was for Haskell), so I ended up piping GHCi to a websocket server that I found on GitHub and a minimal HTML/JS frontend to talk to it: a reorderable list of textareas.

Then I added some security in the form of passing and verifying long random strings (via files, URL arguments and the user, that one is annoying). GHCi is capable of shelling out, so letting every browser tab on my computer talking to it is not ideal.

AFAIK Jupyter does not have any advanced features like dependency tracking between cells, or tracking variables, data, etc. So if you want Haskell in the browser, I recommend my approach, it is small, fast, the UI is configurable, and the whole process is hackable with hooks and transformations at any place.

It certainly can be inefficient depending on what you want to do, but loading files with functions into the scope of your GHCi session works quite well for quick debugging. When cabal repl all necessary deps for the project get loaded and it just works.

RE Jupyter not having advanced features.

Yeah it's a bummer. It seems that notebooks that support these sort of "reactive" workflows are custom built around that model. Marimo, Pluto.jl, and observable are mostly language specific. Creating one would be non trivial.

Do you have your approach documented (tutorial style) anywhere?

https://discourse.haskell.org/t/a-lighter-weight-alternative... talks about workarounds for multiline definitions