oh good, more photo ops for auntie, that should have Putin trembling. next, some carefully chosen words?
Philosopher, likes ethics, epistemology, uncertainty, welfare economics, category theory, climbing 🇺🇦
476 followers 154 following 288 posts
view profile on Bluesky
oh good, more photo ops for auntie, that should have Putin trembling. next, some carefully chosen words?
thanks for the tutorials, won't bug you any more. if you teach you have lucky students
Wow what a striking result. Reminds me of how shocking some of complex analysis is when you come from real analysis. Back in the day when I learned intro model theory the applications were quite dry, mainly just cardinality stuff. Shame such beautiful applications weren't presented
Are there other somewhat accessible examples where proof & model theory is the backbone of algebraic results? Seems that algebra texts rarely mention this kind of stuff (except maybe a parenthetical remark that something reduces to a word problem).
Since, as you noted, you'd expect forgetful functors on naturally occurring algebraic categories not to reflect isos, it's striking that to prove it here you need serious proof & model theory. And the proof has to be quite nonconstructive (?) b/c of Tennenbaum.
waiting to be corrected
ofc one can define < but my super old memory is that that the language of PA doesn't contain <
Perfect, I have Marker and Chang / Keisler. Thank you so much
Thank you! Can you recommend something like a 1st year grad text on model theory that spells out the terminology? Never heard of a reduct
where morphisms are just set-maps that respect relevant structure, nothing to do with definability in PA or anything like that. Is that roughly right? (Asking partly as something analogous happens somewhat surprisingly in the area of expected utility theory that I dabble in) Lovely lecture notes!
Newbie question here, hope you don't mind. So PA doesn't contain "<" but the models can define it in the obvious way, making them ordered semi-rings. Then just to keep track of things, there's a functor that forgets the semi-ring structure, and the claim is that it doesn't reflect isomorphisms,
Another question is whether that would actually be better than the current situation where the US administration just keeps pissing in everyone's soup. Perhaps the world needs an International Divorce Court, not just an International Criminal Court
Let's say the US went full North Korea and cut itself off overnight. Once supply chains readjust and market overreaction recedes, my guess is that it wouldn't make much economic difference, especially if the US-based coorporations can just relocate. But would like to hear from economists though.
How are the transshipments and the blind eye to the shadow fleets going?
It’s one of Putin’s tricks, to get these fawning, humiliating and debasing acts of obeisance in front of others, then to sit there stone faced and occasionally mock
Good to hear the confidence the locals have in the three day SMO
Civitates Foederatas Americas est omnis divisa in partes tres
guy deserves an Ig Nobel for self-debasement
The benefit of home schooling is that you can broaden the curriculum
tfw you are the first contact for aliens and all you feel is shame at what they are about to find out
gospodinov *time shelter*
There's more to being a leader than photo ops and fine words. Shut down the Russian shadow fleet and stop transshipments! www.euronews.com/business/202...
Why don't we hear more from at least some factions of the EU about this? Many of the Western EU leaders are paper tigers, but surely not people like Kaja Kallas.
Might be useful background for readers who are going to struggle as much as me www.quantamagazine.org/monumental-p...
Yes, the more accessible the better!
instructing my younger selves to have saved more money
Given how much North Korea supports Russia, you'd have thought there would be plenty of opportunity to shame South Korea for this. I wonder if it's arguable that the S Korean economic support is more significant than the N Korean military support?
The tip of the left little finger of Kallas contains more intelligence, bravery, dignity, honesty and charm than the entirety of Skabeeva and her lying thieving drunken cronies
Russians now facing the age-old dilemma: when the villagers have pooled their vodka and gasoline, do they drink it or fill up their cars?
Haven't even watched it yet, but seeing Anna smiling like that, I know I am going to enjoy it!
They say that all philosophy is footnotes to Plato, but in fact he merely pre-plagiarized us
Not an expert in this area, but it would be astonishing if anyone could show that polarization is always bad. There are lots of results concerning epistemic networks to the effect that lack of communication between different groups can be good, that convergence can be bad etc..
Algebraic geometry is monkey business
That's a lot lot better than it could have been. Thanks for the summary Kate. I'm glad Melania has come out about the children. Very hard for them to walk that back now.
Nevertheless, it's mostly right, and if you had a hazy memory of what lim inf meant, I think you'd figure it out exactly from this. How many textbooks are typo free?
What makes them reluctant to shut them down?
I'm inclined to hope that it won't make much difference. Maybe it will even be positive by setting off even more alarm bells and help make slow-moving Europe realize it needs to rapidly step up its game. Look at all those meetings Zelensky had with European leaders very recently.
Unscheduled rapid conversion to submarine
The endpoint is the Smithsonian displaying the exceptionally large and gilded Nobel that he did win
London cabbie once won Mastermind
Brought to us by the President of the United Colonies
idk, sounds like a perfectly reasonable explanation of why someone can't read or write or count
Bro ceased to be a human being long, long ago
Very interesting question! Quite often mathematical proofs are like explaining away a bunch of mistakes. You have a rough idea of a proof, explain why this bit doesn't work, refine it, notice that another bit doesn't work, revise the result you are trying to prove etc.
I wonder how similar it is to MAGA being unable to line up behind one stance on Epstein
Thank you for your videos. They help us think of Ukraine every day, and keep our hope and anger alive. With luck, Trump's actions will alarm European leaders and make them realize the urgency of stepping up support. Let's all turn our anger into motivation. Donations, pressure on politicians.
You’d need several dictionaries just for Newcastle and Glasgow
This. Highlight of my life was taking dance classes as electives, relief from grad school stress and welcome social contact. Did it matter that they gave As for showing up?
As actively as the EU buys Russian energy? Or if not, as actively as the EU has massively increased exports to tiny countries that happen to be just across the border from Russia?
Spot on!
Almost always have lounge access, almost never use it. They provide exclusivity in return for strictly worse services to a captive market
Finally, haven't read it, but Johnstone, *Stone Spaces* might be perfect if it didn't have the reputation of being very difficult. Great outline of the history of the subject though.
Quite readable, but restricted to vector spaces, so the partial orderings are assumed to be linear.
There's of course a ton of work in econ, with good survey articles, on when some kind of continuity condition on a partial order ensures some kind of representability. Aliprantis & Tourky *Cones and Duality* discuss partial orders generally, lattices in particular, and topology a lot.
Priestley & Davis, *Intro to Lattices and Order* is the classic intro to lattices, but one of those intro books that is also useful for researchers, so it's not such easy reading. It contains some topology, but mostly in specific applications.
My highly nonexpert impression is that interest in lattices declined in the second half of C20, and that they do not interact particularly well with topology. So it may be too much to expect a contemporary textbook covering both. Nachbin *Topology and Order* might be worth looking at, but it's old.
That's a broad question. Are you interested in particular sorts of partial orders, like linear partial orders on vector spaces? Or general relations between order and topology, e.g. as in Stone duality?
Best to start every date by describing the phenotypical improvements that would cause you to trade up
Sharp cookie, that one
Very interesting observation, it does look like he's lost the room and knows it, the stillness of the audience. Like him or loathe him, you have to admit he's charismatic, or was. But now he's like that uncle retelling the same anecdote for the thirteenth time who's keeping you from the bar
I never found it convincing either. Seems like if you set up the core case tightly enough, you modelling me modelling you ... runs into the halting problem. Oddly, Lewis was aware of such a concern (w/o the explicit link to the halting problem) in an early paper. Hope the follow up convo happens!
To continue trying not to discuss this, when I run quizzes with my very smart students, almost everyone one boxes and defects. So gleaning someone's views about CDT vs EDT from PDs seems a bit of a risky business!
Not trying to open up the discussion on this, but I don't know whether "PD is a Newcomb problem" has made its way into economics. Perhaps someone can tell us. Is it even that well accepted in philosophy?
Many thanks!
Would love to see the syllabus!
If anyone's interested in how some of the philosophy discussion maps into this framework, some of the recent discussion of EDT vs CDT vs FDT (functional decision theory) adopts Pearl's P(o|do(a)) formalism: doi.org/10.5840/jphi...
The folklore that was passed down to me in grad school was that philosophers regarded Savage-style evidential decision theory as more or less a done deal until Newcomb in 1968. Thereafter, the evidential vs causal vs something else debate shows no signs of ending. What's the history in econ?
Wow, talk about being divided by a common language. My guess is that almost all decision theory-ish philosophers think economists are all evidential decision theorists with no interest in causal decision theory
Causal decision theorists usually replace talk about states with some kind of dependency relationship between acts and outcomes. Are you asking: "Why not call such a dependency relation a state?" (I don't have Gilboa's book to hand.)
My knowledge is out of date, but there was a strand of philosophy literature that tried to capture causal decision theory in Savage's framework but concluded you can't. But the approach they considered is different from the one I think you are proposing.
"Don't care at all?" Economists have been discussing the issue since `Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency of optimal plans' Kydland & Prescott J. Pol. Econ. 1977, cited 13000 times. The link to Newcomb was noted in 1982. Broome informed philosophers in 1989.
All gas indeed
It's not average
Maybe he meant "Enemas never age"
There’d be a fair bit of fame for refuting it though!
But that might be hasty. The math conjecture in question comes with a million dollar Millennium prize, and those have attracted cranks since forever, so the general malaise of arXiv is not so clear
Having been happy to more or less only distribute via aXiv in recent years, I must admit this incentivizes me a bit to change that.
Thanks for the discussion! I don't think one should necessarily see posts like "Just nuke them!" as stupid policy proposals that ignore realities, but rather as value expressions like "As a European citizen, I want you to attach much higher priority to Ukraine, you can figure out the details".
My first donation was EUR 2000 in April 2022 and have been contributing regularly ever since. And yet the war continues. Perhaps things are not so simple. If you mean that everyone should do this, yes, but then we are back to a problem of social coordination and the need to pressure our leaders.
A major issue is that the experts in question are not independent. They are politicians who want to get reelected, and bureaucrats who want to retain very nice jobs. So e.g. when they talk big about sanctions but allow a colossal increase in shadow trade, it seems to be the vested interests talking.
Let the bankers get back to the core business of fraud and we’ll live off the trickle down. Worked well before
Don't forget twenty billion or so on energy to fund the Russian war effort!
What's the data on what's in the tap water? Seem much more relevant, at least from the point of view of home filters etc.
Personally I am looking forward to becoming a tetrapod once again
He’s not anti-meteorology, he’ll just be seeking a balanced view on the whether the weather vanes control the weather
Very enjoyable explanation! I wish mathematicians spent more time explaining what the basic problem they are trying to solve is, and why it’s interesting.
Still, wouldn’t completely surprise me if someone had noticed in advance the opportunities in the right level of censoring
Agreed. What I actually thought was that they will be happy it turns out that way and then perhaps make further decisions on the basis of that happy outcome, but too long to say in one post
Wouldn’t surprise me if they’ve tweaked censoring to be a covert way of boosting. So now the badge of honour will be to retell your censored post in a slightly more anodyne way. “Look at this reasonable statement that got banned” or “Look what I can say without saying it”
📌
Every night out with friends needs a designated non-hot dog eater
Ever thought that you are part of the problem, not the solution? www.ciel.org/news/new-eu-...
Used to wear all black head to toe (including balaclava, gloves, hat, sunglasses) when I lived on a tiny UV drenched island in Hong Kong. Quite common there. But in Europe looking like that visibly scares people
Not convinced. It sounds like a variant of “Trump is playing 4D chess” when much simpler explanations are available.
Stuff like having access to healthcare, basic nutrition, being born in a country with a functioning education system, not a warzone, blah blah must swamp IQ. But if you want to equalize all those factors then say IQ is 18% of the small remainder, ok
I remember schoolmates droning on and on about “What is i?". I wonder if quotienting R[X] by X^2 + 1 would have saved some time. No one had any problem with R[X] or quotients.
Or non-well-funded set theory
There’s no least bad part; for each bad thing, there’s something worse
Posterity not being kind to Frege (From Manin, *A Course in Mathematical Logic for Mathematicians*)
Getting the feeling that I’ve found a book about rings of continuous functions
