Sure, but my old Google cloud apps on python 2.7 will one day get rug-pulled and forced to upgrade. It can only stay working forever if the platform doesn't change underneath it.

> Sure, but my old Google cloud apps on python 2.7 will one day get rug-pulled and forced to upgrade

“Degradation over time” was being cited as a reason not to self-host. Pointing out that not self-hosting exposes you to risk of others changing the environment so it no longer supports your software is a diametrically-opposed argument.

Oops! I missed that point entirely.

"intents and purposes" ... I think I was saying it your way until at least age 30.

You may want to re-read that entire comment veeeery closely.

Indeed! Ha. Thank you.

Nextdoor also used to do it well, but it has become like Facebook with flame wars and political craziness.

Got a reference for this?

My understanding is Nash equilibrium exists in any game with finite states, regardless of perfect or imperfect information.

The bit about announcing your strategy holds by definition - the equilibrium is defined such that no player can improve, thus it doesn't matter if the other player's strategy is known. Also, I don't think there's a requirement that Nash strategies be reachable by iteration.

Everything you said about Nash equilibrium is true, I didn't mean to imply that it can only be found in perfect information games via iteration.

What I wanted to say is that methods for finding it via iteration and self-play exist and are well defined but only for perfect information games.

The research itself is here: https://ai.facebook.com/blog/rebel-a-general-game-playing-ai...

Hey just wanted to say thanks for sharing this.

I believe you could say the minimax strategy to the 2 player game of heads up no limit is solved but beyond that is stretching it.

I am way out of it though. I suspect anything more than 2 players is unsolvable when you factor in the stochastic nature of the drunk guy at the table with more than 2 players. Then based on his play he subtracts or adds EV to us randomly.

I won't even let myself think past this though with poker because IMO it is a waste of time.

I think it's because the publisher retains copyright. There is a limit on how "done" the manuscript can be and still be shared for free online. Some universities have started to fight back against this by limiting the scope of copyright restrictions that publishers can impose.

No, in most of physics there is no such limit in practice. The only difference between my published work and the preprint arxiv versions is the font and whether the layout is two columns or one column. They are word-for-word identical with identical figures.

Is it possible that you broke the rules of your journal, but nobody mothers going after a single researcher?

I'm not krastanov and everything is possible, but many publishers do not have such rules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_publishers_by...

In my particular case, no, there were no pro-forma rules broken.

Sweet. Didn't know this existed. Is your site theme custom?

From a quick check of https://jsonresume.org/ it looks like they only have document themes, not website themes.

Html is one of the output methods supported.

I use a customized Kendall theme.

I started reading through your site a bit. Great content.

Wanted to let you know that the "Here is the Doxygen-generated documentation for the BADGER layer" link is broken on this page: https://littlegreenviper.com/miscellany/forensic-design-docu...

Hey, thanks!

I'll look at that.

I think you are right about high cost vs low cost plans. The low cost plans routinely get the worst rates... Kind of the opposite of price discrimination if those buyers are poor. This recent WSJ article might be of interest:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hospital-prices-healthcare-insu...

Not mentioned yet is http://elitetrader.com. There is a lot of crap but if you spend enough time to learn which posters are legit then you can really learn a lot. There is also like 20 years of history to look up in the forums if you are inclined.

...and n=10, and they measured a ton of covariates and reported only the 'significant' ones. Not much actual information here.