Interesting. I was never really happy with any spaced repetition algorithm, so I recently implemented my own dumb system which simply asks you for the number of days after which the card shall be shown again: https://github.com/kldtz/vmn
Usually my intuition about how well I know something is not too far off. If you don't specify anything, it doubles the time since the last review.
I had a similar problem where I can't remember the answer to the card, but after revealing it, it seemed too easy to make it due in a few days, so I would lie to the program and press Hard/Good. Later I removed scheduling times on top of buttons and decided to trust the algorithm. I believe it helped me to stop caring about schedule times and loosing progress on a certain card. After all, these algorithms were made for ordinary people with ordinary memory behavior.
I think my problem is that I'm not using the system as intended. I learn new vocabulary mainly by reading texts or watching videos in the target language and use spaced repetition to keep track of my progress. If I can't remember a word (as indicated by SR), I'll reread the text/rewatch the video where I've first encountered it. I don't want to keep reviewing the same word in my spaced repetition program, especially not in the same session.
Yes, you can write Python code that runs with missing or wrong type hints. Not ideal, but you can add a static type checker (mypy) as a step in your CI pipeline and reject commits that fail this step. Not much discipline required.
Seems like a lot of effort went into typesetting this, wow!
I can recommend "Calculus: Basic Concepts for High Schools" by the same author (L.V. Tarasov) to anybody unfamiliar with calculus: https://archive.org/details/TarasovCalculus/page/n1/mode/2up. It's written as a dialogue between author and reader.
Learning calculus in high school made me question everything. You can never measure anything, never mind the area of a circe using calculus. It will only ever be a "good enough" measurement.
There is a point where all of you will finally come to appreciate the limits of rationalism and materialism and let go a bit more.
Generally we think things are far away when it takes a longer time to get to them. We have some reasonable assurance that the speed of light is immutable and so we can measure the distance in our frame of reference by bouncing light off of Pluto. Are you nerd sniping sir?
I am making the distinction of what we perceive to be reality to actual reality.
Distance is a human concept. The moment we stop thinking distance does not exist. It may be a limitation that we perceive distance as something to be overcome through rocket ships and not through other methods.
Time is also in the same category. If you want to read a good book on the topic read “the end of Time quote by Jason Barbour.
I have thought it was interesting that, Christians believe, God became human and of all the things in the universe he could choose to teach about, apparently more than anything it is all about love (of a particular kind, actually).
I think OP understands that calculus is an enormously powerful tool.
I think the OP's point is that much like the Newtonian physics that paired with calculus to put a man on the moon, calculus is a pragmatically magnificent tool that doesn't yield exactly correct or perfectly accurate answers for many questions. Just "enough accuracy for the problem you're solving," in some very real senses.
Huh, what are we talking about here? Calculus does give exact results. What questions are we talking about? Fundamentally statistical questions are going to have inherent uncertainties, its got nothing to do with Calculus.
Still not understanding what your issue is with calculus. I think so far you only have a problem with its outcomes when you feed it garbage. We expect to see "Calculus" diverge when integrating near the lattice spacing. I don't think we wholly disagree but I am doubtful you are going to make headway fighting against calculus.
I don’t have a problem with calculus, I’m just expressing its limitations. Using calculus to know the area of a circle is useful but it never really measures the area of a circle because the area of any circle is infinite.
It is not really about measuring things, but about reaching a definitive answer given some assumptions. Sometimes our notation of numbers get in the way of writing things shortly (instead of infinite decimal places), other times we can use a fraction and be exact on the paper we write on.
I would say calculus is about solving things exactly using infinitesimals and limits. There's also plenty of equations that can only be solved numerically.
What you're saying is in the practical real world we can never measure things exactly. That's true but that's not what I got from calculus. Irrational numbers come to mind (not calculus).
I come to almost the opposite conclusion as you. It is amazing that we can solve equations in spite of infinities.
Just some test feedback: On my phone I have to scroll horizontally to read the text on the website. A part is always cut off. (Same problem on the linked example sites.)
The author gets the whole system backwards. Medicine is the most expensive thing you can study at a German university (~30K € per student per year). That's why the number of slots is very limited. Now the demand is higher than this limited number of slots, so universities need some criterion to reject applicants. The criterion happens to be mainly the GPA.
But I agree that the situation is suboptimal. Ideally, there should be more available slots. If we had too many physicians, we could pay them less and the demand would drop.
Thanks for the feedback! I agree, manipulating the social environment sounds evil and may lead down a dangerous path.
I was mainly thinking about what Skinner describes as bringing "the individual under the control of some remote consequences of his behavior". For example, the prospect of ultimately bringing about the extinction of humanity in a few hundred years is too remote to have an effect on anybody's decisions. It would be good to have a system that mediates the effect. I guess, "internalisation of external costs" sounds less threatening.
I can't read the whole article because it's behind a paywall. From what I see, it's about the inaccessibility of primary data from mRNA-vaccine trials by Biontech/Pfizer and Moderna. Possibly related English source: https://ebm.bmj.com/content/27/4/199
It's a charming idea, kind of whimsical. I like that. But the screen really seems too small, even for writing. I recently bought a used ThinkPad X220 for 180€ (typing on it right now). OK, the battery won't last 100 hours, but I'd take it any day over this.
I agree. It also seems wildly inefficient to ask every student to read all those originals instead of systematic modern introductions. History is accumulating, so this becomes an impossible task at some point. If the ideas expressed in a text cannot be separated from their "original presentation", maybe they aren't that good after all. Exactly what I had in mind when I wrote this recently: https://verzettelung.com/22/09/10/
Usually my intuition about how well I know something is not too far off. If you don't specify anything, it doubles the time since the last review.