Relevant SMBC www.smbc-comics.com/comic/a-fran... .

Also, in the current campaign, while the Koavists have some elements from Judaism, they've got a bunch from others. In some sense they are the exact opposite of Judaism since they are pretty close to being literal ovdei kochavim.

Although I've also stolen stuff from other real world cultures and religions, that people haven't noticed. Judaism is easier because I know more about it.

Empirically, it takes very little for a general problem of a puzzle-like form to be NP-hard. I'm not aware of a general theorem that makes this notion precise. Similarly, problems in NP which are not NP-complete are also empirically very hard to come by.

So is the point how shallow markets can go to really weird places? Or that prediction markets can be really distorted by who the user base is?

Or even better "You cannot wish to change the rules of wishing, which includes this rule."

There's a whole bit in "Godel, Escher, Bach"about meta-genies which are used to make wishes about genies, and meta-meta-genies, and so on.

Can you expand on how passing necessarily can prevent a win? I'm not seeing it immediately, especially given that Connect 2 and Connect 3 this is not true for.

Kudos for predicting this!

My knowledge base is not great here. Anecdotally though I've generally heard the tot ending in more Conservative and Reform contexts and her the im ending in more Orthodox contexts. I don't know anything anything about the actual history though.

Sure, but this turned out to be correct in the Legends canon and that at the same time Palpatine didn't tell anyone about the threat. Star Wars is fiction, and doesn't really make that coherent consistent political points which shouldn't be surprising given the sheer number of writers involved.

In what is now the "Legends" non-canon, this is surprisingly close to what happened, in that it turns out part of why he was uniting the galaxy is that he knew about an incoming threat from outside the galaxy.

Because Shannon isn't as well known as say Gödel to the general public, and the ability to mark philosophical claims related to his work is hard so they often just don't know about it.

I'm really curious what they were saying this about. Also, relevant xkcd xkcd.com/1724/ .

Re: Using Desmos, for the basic Algebra II, I'd say this is fine. For any higher level version of the course, they should be able to do it algebraically to at least show that x=4 is the only solution. But using Desmos to identify a potential solution seems fine at all levels in most contexts.

Both of these seem like reasonable ways of doing this problem. Related: my algebra II students seem to have a lot of trouble deciding when to reject a negative number. e.g. Some will correctly reject -4 in the above, but then will reject log_2 x=-1 in (log_2 x)^2 =1.

Update: Oscar Cunningham has pointed out serious issues with their statistical analysis and has pointed out that using the tests they are using even genuinely random strings of digits don't look "random" so the paper is fatally flawed.

One thing I find frustrating is that my intuition really strong back up both of these as slamdunk arguments even though I intellectually realize that they are both terrible arguments for exactly the reasons you outline.