Gavin Zhao @[email protected]

First full day running @buddiesofbudgie #Budgie Desktop on top of a Wayland compositor. Even in it's still very heavily WIP form.

Panel exclusion zone now implemented and thanks to some rubber ducking / help from @EbonJaeger , figured out what was wrong with my Budgie PopoverRedux.

Old Budgie.Popover code is gone, all the popovers are using the new implementation which are basically just Gtk.Popover. It'll be renamed back to Budgie.Popover once I do cleanup of PopoverManager and maybe refactor some more code.

Screenshot shows the bluetooth applet... well now being shown, as well as VS Code not being allowed to be maximized under the panel.

Biggest usability thing next for me will be making Raven not 100% full screen and the panel to always be set to the primary monitor rather than whichever monitor is in focus.

In math research papers (particularly the "good" ones) one often observes a negative correlation between the conceptual difficulty of a component of an argument, and its technical difficulty: the parts that are conceptually routine or straightforward may take many pages of technical computation, whereas the parts that are conceptually interesting (and novel) are actually relatively brief, once all the more routine auxiliary steps (e.g., treatment of various lower order error terms) are stripped away.

I theorize that this is an instance of Berkson's paradox. I found the enclosed graphic from https://brilliant.org/wiki/berksons-paradox to be a good illustration of this paradox. In this (oversimplified) example, a negative correlation is seen between SAT scores and GPA in students admitted to a typical university, even though a positive correlation exists in the broader population, because students with too low of a combined SAT and GPA will get rejected from the university, whilst students with too high a score would typically go to a more prestigious school.

Similarly, mathematicians tend to write their best papers where the combined conceptual and technical difficulty of the steps of the argument is close to the upper bound of what they can handle. So steps that are both conceptually and technically easy don't occupy much space in the paper, whereas steps that are both conceptually and technically hard would not have been discovered by the mathematician in the first place. This creates the aforementioned negative correlation.

Often the key to reading a lengthy paper is to first filter out all the technically complicated steps and identify the (often much shorter) conceptual core.

I hope this email finds you well, and taking better care of yourself.

At last, some information from Google that students can really use!

this might be the first haskell program in the world that natively runs on arm64 windows

user: hello company, i would like to access your main product, you know, the one people come to you for, the main thing

company: HAVE YOU HEARD OF A I

During lunch a friend mentioned that you can just supply a HTTP URL to vim on the command line and it would use curl to download that resource and allow you to edit the content. I jokingly asked whether if you enter :w it would then issue a HTTP POST back to the origin which is of course ridiculous.

It issues a PUT

#foxesInLove #comic

Source: https://foxes-in-love.tumblr.com/post/750807931496333312
Copyright: https://foxesinlove.net

Curve fitting methods by @xkcd

WARNING! This image may trigger PINSecurity.

From an analysis of 3.4m PIN code leaked from several data breaches https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/most-common-pin-codes/