> Given the centrality of linear algebra to applied mathematics (even in places where you wouldn't first expect, like the theory of regular expressions and finite automata)
Decreased activity in the ACC/medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) was a consistent finding and the magnitude of this decrease predicted the intensity of the subjective effects. Based on these results, a seed-based pharmaco-physiological interaction/functional connectivity analysis was performed using a medial prefrontal seed. Psilocybin caused a significant decrease in the positive coupling between the mPFC and PCC. These results strongly imply that the subjective effects of psychedelic drugs are caused by decreased activity and connectivity in the brain's key connector hubs, enabling a state of unconstrained cognition.
The TL;DR I would give is this: Clojure is preferable when doing server-side performance-intensive software or in situations where its JVM library reach provides a significant advantage. Racket is a lot nicer for client-side stuff where you need a fast launch, lower memory profile, a GUI, or distributable executables.
If you already have a solid development environment set up and have spent a lot of time learning project management tools, you might have an easy enough time getting started with Clojure, but getting started with Racket tooling is easy even for children.
Clojure is a lot better out-of-the-box for FP, but Racket has third-party tools (like Rackjure and fector) that do a lot to close the gap. On the other hand, Racket has pattern matching out of the box which is really nice, but you can get that in Clojure as well using external libraries. One problem that you can't fix in a library is Clojure's omnipresent nil; Racket does a much better job of ensuring sensible semantics in error conditions, partly due to the fact that pattern-matching is built-in.
No, I often buy used text books when I find them cheap so I can fill in what I missed by skipping out on a degree.
I have a separate title on discrete math (Epp) but its companion only had some solutions to exercises available in a separate $60 [used] book. I found this title and figured that with the intersection of ML and discrete math I'd have better luck. (Staring at a ton of problems in a text book without knowing which ones I'd be able to verify my solutions against - the Epp book - was a daunting prospect for self-study).
Kuhn Poker [1] is a game of imperfect information, which was solved by its creator in 1950. The only fundamental difference between Kuhn Poker and LHE, the game discussed in the article, is that regular LHE has much more cards involved, making the game more complex.
Your statement is technically correct because of the use of the word "completely", but wrong in a practical sense. The algorithm used to solve these games is iterative, so the solution only ever approaches a complete solution, but this is only meaningful if you want to argue that a 0.0000001BB difference in win-rate per hand is really meaningful.
How is it misinformation? The human doctor would not tell us his diagnosis in terms of percentages, because we as humans have a hard time grasping probabilities intuitively. That doesn't mean that a probabilistic diagnosis would not be more accurate.
The doctors job is to provide me with as much information about the objective criteria of my physical condition as possible. However when it comes to making choices about my treatment, say in the case of accepting/rejecting an experimental drug with some potentially nasty side effects, it should be entirely my own value judgement on what to do with said information.
I didn't use a RSS reader before Google Reader shutdown, and it was actually cries over the event that made me feel like I was missing out on something. Now I'm a happy user of Newsblur and can indeed concur that I was missing out. One man's tragedy is another mans fortune I guess :)
Where can I read more about this?