You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

TylerJay comments on Open thread, Mar. 2 - Mar. 8, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: MrMind 02 March 2015 08:19AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (155)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (155)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: ctintera 02 March 2015 05:16:29PM 2 points [-]

I'm having difficulty envisioning what problem this solves. Leap years are already defined by a very simple function, and subbing in a cosine for a discrete periodicity adds complexity, does it not?

Comment author: TylerJay 02 March 2015 05:42:48PM 1 point [-]

Last line of the article explains the motivation:

I wouldn’t mention it at all, but the inventor is not a human being and it’s a very good example of a “pure mechanical invention”.

Comment author: ctintera 02 March 2015 07:15:12PM *  7 points [-]

Having an algorithm fit a model to some very simple data is not noteworthy either. It's possible that the means by which the "pure mechanical invention" was obtained are interesting, but they are not elaborated on in the slightest.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit