Trying to open this document for download I'm firmly (unusually firmly) warned off by my ISP. It really was a 'go ahead if you want to be scammed' sort of thing. Anybody have an opinion about this?
Many people, mathematicians and aspirants, would find "Mathematics made Difficult" by Carl E Linderholm (pub. 1972) entertaining and possibly instructive. PDFs are available to those without scruples.
I'm no climate change denier, but there is a complexity to the effects which NASA has identified (and recently updated) https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fer...
In particular the Sahel, famously arid and increasing in size a few decades ago, is now becoming more fertile again to the extent that people are moving back there.
The first half degree Celsius of human induced warming was quite probably a good thing on net. There's really no way that the fifth half degree will be anything but a catastrophe.
This was a Time Team Special in 2005 [Series 18, Episode 138], unfortunately named the "King of Bling". The location was given as Prittlewell, Essex [on the outskirts of Southend]. For non-Brits, Time Team has been a very long-running series on British TV, popularising field archeology to a very wide audience. It took a 'quick hit' approach following-up local suggestions to do a single week's digging with good resources. It reported the week's progress in a single, compact and well-structured broadcast. Much loved, it is now in hiatus, if not gone forever. Why it was not mentioned in connection with this 'discovery' is hard to say...
Because unfortunately, behind the scenes, Time Team is not well respected in the Archaeology community. A couple of their archaeologists were good, but overall they misinterpreted sites and caused problems when they dug (e.g. mattocking through a skull by mistake).
This site is quite old news really, but the notable part is that they've finished some of their analysis and are publishing, hence why it's showing up in the news now.
I think it depends on the part of the community you speak to. Yes, they had a very unrealistic dig schedule, but they brought resource that most sites can't dream of to many locations that would otherwise not be investigated, and delivered full reports as well as proper Reithian television.
Source: archaeologist mother & sister, and appeared on Time Team myself... :)
Smartphones of both flavours can load cheap or free apps that are quite effective enough to read barcodes and identify books.
Librarything and its various catalogue tools can help with the metadata too.
That said, the advice to get specialist help is well-founded.
I haven't got time to read all this dissertation on an interesting topic at the moment, but I was surprised to find that the relevant work of the other great "Donald" (Knuth) is not mentioned. He called it 'literate programming'. Here's a reference: https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/lp.html
As DK puts it himself: "The main idea is to treat a program as a piece of literature, addressed to human beings rather than to a computer." I think code navigation would naturally fall out from this approach.
On the contrary, literate programming is heavily used in notebook environments (ipython, RMarkdown, Mathematica, etc) and in practice, code structured this way seems to implode once it gets above a few kloc. Narratives just don't seem to do a good job of hierarchy / modularization / separation of responsiblity, which is the key to programming in the large.
> literate programming is heavily used in notebook environments (ipython, RMarkdown, Mathematica, etc)
Do any of those actually implement Literate Programming as DK intended? As in "you can move the code around to wherever makes most sense for your narrative"? As best I know, almost all "literate programming" today is just the intermingling of code and text blocks (e.g. Docco et al) in the same order the code would have to be anyway (i.e. there's no TANGLE, only WEAVE.)
Note that literate programming and "modularization/separation" are both techniques for organizing your code, but they aren't mutually exclusive (though I understand the temptation to use only one). (Aside: what are now called "sections" in literate programming were originally called "modules".) (Disclaimer: I'm not sure I know what you mean by literate programming in notebook environments.)
Knuth wrote programs with pen/pencil on paper (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10172924) (and from all I can tell, still does so), so Knuth-style Literate Programming's facilities for code "navigation" are all paper-based: at the back of the book there is an index to all the variables (where each variable is defined and all the places it's used), and (in the published books) there are even mini-indices on each two-page spread, restricted to just the variables that occur on those pages. The cross-references (like "See also sections 163 and 927" or "This code is used in section 4") are also meant to help you "navigate" to the respective pages.
In one of the "internals of TeX" videos, Knuth mentions how when he got to a particular section of the code, he had to move to a larger desk (yes, desk) so that everything could stay in sight. If you're comfortable with such a style of programming, paper gives you a lot of freedom: you can have a very large number of (literal) "tabs", cover parts of pages, make throwaway annotations while reading, etc.
Anyway, as far on-screen navigation goes, with pdfTeX there are hyperlinks: you can navigate from the mention of any section to its actual code, and backwards. (E.g. start at section 4 http://texdoc.net/texmf-dist/doc/generic/knuth/tex/tex.pdf#p... and go to one of the mentioned sections, and back from them to 4.) (It would be nice for there to be even more hyperlinks, but no one seems to have implemented them as Pascal isn't exactly popular these days.)
And to answer your question most concretely: the (recent) online version of the Literate-Programming book Physically Based Rendering: From Theory To Implementation has some innovative navigation aids IMO. (Random "page" / section from the book: http://www.pbr-book.org/3ed-2018/Camera_Models/Realistic_Cam...)
Interesting point, thank you! I have always liked the ideas behind literate programming. For my next piece of work on this I think I can use LP to really motivate the need for such tools.
I guess she means he left communism. A belief in history, almost as a god, is inherent in communism as I understand it. The changes they believe in are pre-ordained, they need only to join the stream.
Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. The topic is Auden, not another litany about communism, and I'm sure Arendt meant something more subtle than that.
If you read the article, it's clear that "leaving the train of history" refers both to abandoning communism and to not subsequently "changing train" to another 20th C ideology (capitalism/Freudianism/refined Marxism), instead choosing to subscribe to Christianity (understood as a conservative orthodoxy).
So you're right about the association of historicism/Whig history with communism, but for Arendt that category (historicist ideologies) didn't just include communism.
This doesn't make sense for various reasons, to me, but people's understanding of communism varies (I'm a Marxist). For one, both the belief in the History and the History comes after the very reality that makes history possible, and we construct History only after we look at the facts and analyze them. Thus, belief in History as if it's not a "moving target" (so to say) presupposes History before material grounds that generates history and thus is idealistic (so it's not Marxist). Second, Marxism is more about understanding the History and explaining mechanisms that make certain transitions (like social class or economic system) possible, like a physicist explains the universe, rather than fixing an understanding of the History and working from there (which is very problematic from a empiricist point of view). This can be contrasted with other understandings of "socialism" most importantly Anarchism which starts from a ground truth that originates from morality (e.g. it is bad to kill people).
Communism does not have the pretensions to divinity and supernatural aspects that we see manifested during elections in the USA.
It has a recognition that the forces of production change. That relations of production change, and this base changes superstructure in the society. Hunter gatherer tribes make way for Sumerian and Greek slave empires, make way for feudal Europe, which make way for capitalism and bourgeois republics.
The Paris commune, the Russian revolution, the 1936 Spanish republic etc. are seen in this light as nascent proto-steps toward the next superstructure coming out of changed forces of production and relations of production.
History has already seen four major changes from one system to another, but not by means of divinity. Marx's pointed to contradictions inherent to capitalism. I think the 2008 bailout and crisis would be a sign of the eventual end in Marx's view - US Treasury secretary Hank Paulson said GE CEO Jeff Immelt visited him on September 15, 2008 and said GE was having trouble financing day-to-day operations. Events like that are harbingers of the eventual collapse of the capitalist economic system, in Marx's view. For now, the government and taxpayer bailing out the capitalists and corporations work, in Marx's view, one day it will not work. But the collapses are only part of the collapse, advances had to have happened to shift the system as well. It is not divinity, it is history continuing to be dialectic.
In the Dark Universe novel by Daniel F Galouye, a section of humanity has hidden themselves for generations in lightless caverns below a poisoned Earth. They have become functionally blind, and find their way about by knocking stones together for echo location.
