News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

darkinvisible

Re:A Road to Lisp: Why Lisp on Friday July 10, 2026 @07:08AM (#48858341)
I just read the (cool!) article...didn't see a single CAR or CDR --was using them quite a bit... last century!
Re:What it takes to transpose a matrix on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @05:35AM (#48277306)
Does it use switch in place? x = x XOR y, y = x XOR y, x = x XOR y
Re:Facebook loses users for the first time on Thursday February 03, 2022 @03:24AM (#30190041)
Another issue: dumbing down. Connecting via web / browser has gradually dropped a lot of stuff and has become just like the mobile app. I used to log in a couple of times a week; now it's not even once a month.
Re:Google and Facebook are watching our every move online on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @07:42PM (#16278881)
Ghostery: 25 uBlock Origin: 62
Re:Category Theory, Syntactically (2016) on Thursday April 27, 2017 @01:10PM (#14213093)
The key to e.g. Goedel's results is the Fixed Point Lemma: if ψ is a formula with v free then there is a sentence φ such that, provably, φ <=> ψ(<φ>) [where <..> is the numerical code of .. ].

The proof, if you are interested, is not difficult. Let sub be the function that describes, via codes, substituting the (numeral n_ of the number) n for a free variable v of a formula χ : sub(<χv>, n_) = <χn_>. Then the PROOF is: consider ψ(sub(v,v)), call it θv, let m be <θv> and let φ be θm_. Then, provably, φ <=> ψ(sub(m_,m_)) <=> ψ(sub(<θv>,m_)) <=> ψ(<θm_>) <=> ψ(<φ>). Ta-da!

Goedel used this to get the "formula that says I am not provable", φ <=> not Prov(<φ>).

Narrowing it a bit, how about paying to read research I WROTE? I tried to access a paper of mine I didn't have handy and sure enough the fee was $35. Turned to sci-hub, of course. I pirated myself. --Anonymous, just in case