curses, deleted again!?!

imagehi all this interesting recent site-wide “hot” mathoverflow question asking about hard proofs that cant be simplified had a related question with high votes, asking if maybe mathematics could get simplified in some way in the future & it seemed a great moment to cite (auto) thm proving, gowers, turing, etcetera. alas, the PowersThatBe™ were not amused 😕

I think we all secretly hope that in the long run mathematics becomes easier, in that with advances of perspective, today’s difficult results will seem easier to future mathematicians. If I were cryogenically frozen today, and thawed out in one hundred years, I would like to believe that by 2110 the Langlands program would be reduced to a 10-page pamphlet (with complete proofs) that I could read over breakfast.

four downvotes and four close votes, deleted in only a few hours! ouch! oh yeah and since its a “community-wiki” question, for this public service effort, no points gained for upvotes [but, maybe usefully, no lost points for downvotes either]… also in their system, if your non-community-wiki downvoted question is deleted, at least you gain back the lost points after its all vaporized… leading to a unique cyber experience of “going around in a circle”… so tried “dipping my toe in the water” on MO & the water is not fine, it has sharks swimming in it … chomp, bite, snap, crunch 😯

hey no big deal right? its just like when in school you get a paper back with miscellaneous lines through it or lots of red marks on it. ok, admittedly of course its not really like that in cyberspace, because there it takes ~5x more people to do it!


imageoh yeah well its not all whips and chains. theres a teeny )( bit of fun/amusement in seeing how high of rep the sentries have. oh hey wow look at that! RA 3.4K, RB 22K, WS 22K, TT 25K, HJRW 11.1 for a grand combined total of ~83K in a single shot! wow, not bad! just try to beat that high score! 😀 gotta keep those unwashed barbarians outside the gates! sledgehammer to crush a fly, anyone? 😈

Sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug.

Thats not a bug, its a feature!

If you have a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.

do you suppose its just a STEM version of the Overton window? yeah of course that must be it! because that phenomenon is surely intrinsic to human nature (as politics is intrinsic to all human societies & communities…)

imageoh yeah I also asked about the zhang proof recently on… I collect closed questions like hemingway collects rejection letters from publishers! man it would be slightly amusing to record all those Ive got on,, etc…. its truly incredible/earthshaking stuff…. (hey stackexchange these are my real “badges” of honor! battle scars! besides, badges!?! we dont need no stinkin badges!)


the pioneers are the ones with the arrows in their back —anonymous

elsewhere though got a tip in the chatroom on this neat physics question asking about the connections between physics and CS. cybersynchronistically was just starting collection of links on that for a future blog post, and my answer got me a quick 70 points 😀 …

you win some and you lose some … it all comes out in the wash … guess ya just gotta hang out where you’re welcome … the se mods seem to not realize at times that human participation in cyberspace is the real scarce/valuable quantity … you hear lots these days about user generated content but what about user vaporized content?

@#$*! have probably lost over a dozen Q/A over two years on the site… does it really hurt anything at all to leave it up with low votes? heck they are probably losing hits that way… cant wait til someday there are halfway decent alternatives to stackexchange and its intrinsic empowerment of overzealous holier-than-thou control freaks! frankly sometimes it reminds me of milgrams infamous stanford prisoner/warden experiment … the lifetime-appointment for mods couldnt be a more perfect recipe for supercilious bullying occasionally verging on arrogant tyranny! the mgt does close to absolutely zilch to reign in heavyhanded highrep users— you know sort of like the relationship between Obama & the NSA!

the highrep users sometimes seem more like near-robotic walking encyclopedias with near-photographic memory than helpful/creative human scientific researchers … focused on irrelevant minutia, buzzing anklebiting mosquitos … question/answers that actually advance research boundaries while ostensibly/professedly sought, seem to be rare exceptionshighrated open questions seem to have little connection with deep problems in the theory… the community clearly would much rather meticulously enumerate problems than actually work on them!

%$#@! alas right now its the only game in town … hey stackexchange elitists you better watch your back … heck the apathetic crowds & their self-appointed, mutual-admiration-society wardens with their rigid groupthink there have negligible innovation/imagination/creativity anyway … who couldnt think outside the box even if it was full of holes … on the site at least … what a mountain of wasted talent! paradoxically some research-focused sites that are largely not focused on advancing existing knowledge, only citing it, with consistently extreme aversion to formulating/discussing new ideas/results! …

so as RS said in chat a lot talking to B, /sigh … guess Im just taking it all too seriously huh!


19 thoughts on “curses, deleted again!?!

  1. Jason

    What’s the problem with mods reaction? In first case, you really were off-topic (the question was about math becoming easier for human comprehension, not machines.) In second case, your reference to Hilbert was essentially a masked way to say I had no brains to understand the Zhang’s proof, please explain it at the level accessible to me. It would be more appropriate to ask specific questions about the techniques used in the paper that are hard to understand.

    1. vznvzn Post author

      wow jason thats some pretty deep stuff/analysis there. you actually read all that? hey really I was just testing you! didnt expect anyone to take me seriously or read all that right!? based on your response, think you have a real promising future as a possible stackexchange elitist yourself! give it a shot, Im sure you’ll climb the ranks quickly!

      in the 1st case, my point was that machines will help humans understand math better! does that make any sense to you, or is it not coloring between the lines, and thinking outside the box too much?

      in the 2nd, what line gave away that I dont have brains to understand the zhang proof, which line did you think reflected that thought? it looks like you can mindread my head and read between the lines exactly in the ways that *dont* benefit my own thinking! a sort of *anti empathy* rather than *empathy*… thats quite a remarkable ability and again, that will surely help you rapidly climb the se rep ladder & achieve greatness in the stackexchange realm. am sure youll fit right in.

      speaking of the milgram experiments, see also stockholm syndrome

  2. JD

    Professor Nuri,
    Thanks for responding! To summarize, I wanted to tell you about how I stumbled upon your work by accident – how I searched for you for hours and hours and how I finally found you. And I didn’t want to say too much of it, regardless of how innocent, because everything is not everyone’s business. I will go ahead and flatter you in public though – you are a genius, not to mention an outrageously persistent one. A veritable role model in persistence, I say. And..well, maybe only one step short of a first rate poet.
    But I only found out about the aforementioned in my search for other things. And so my desire to keep our discussion not ENTIRELY in public may be to some degree for my own protection. Because I can be persistent myself, and often find myself interested in affairs of the world that certain other people may not appreciate my interest in. But I am somewhat anonymous here, and if you feel comfortable talking here, then I have no choice but to obey. Or we can chat somewhere real-time like an SSL anonymous IRC server.
    The reason I originally wrote to you is because I think you know something about the origin of bitcoin without really knowing that you do. And I want to know if bitcoin is good or evil. Sure, it can be hard to say whether or not a THING is good or evil, but I fear that those who created it just may be evil. And as you may know, knowing too much (or talking tooooo much) about bitcoin may just get you in Trouble. As I often find myself thinking about the future, I find this to be an important subject. For the love of money is the root of all of these evils, etc. And money will be at the core, even, of the end of things. Which may not be entirely too far off. I am not necessarily a computer genius, but I do know some things. So anyway, that’s why money and bitcoin, etc are important to me.
    I don’t expect that everything that is important to me to be important to you, and so I rely on your generosity to help a traveler out.

    P.S. I also thought I’d recommend a book that you may or may not have heard of. It is by John Robison of Scotland, 1798. It is called Proofs of a Conspiracy. You can find it at

    1. vznvzn Post author

      hi JD …. as my bio on this blog says, am not a professor, only play one on tv 😀 some wild stuff & near ramblings there in your comment ❗
      yes enjoy chatting with just about anyone & you sound like you have some key stuff to converse on. you can find me on stackexchange chat rooms which have dinked around with for over 2yrs now… recently have been active in the bitcoin chatroom…. are you familiar with stackexchange? (links in upper right corner of this blog). their chat has a good interface, recommend it.
      would like to ask you for clarification on your comments above but will hold off hoping you can figure out stackexchange chat. (you need to earn 20pts anywhere on stackexchange to be able to chat). see you around… ❓

  3. JD

    Do not pretend that you are not a Professor, because I know that you are one! Perhaps you have earned your degree under a different name, or perhaps at a Foreign university. There is no need for false modesty with me. But it does not matter whether or not the Academic Industrial Complex has chosen to acknowledge you. Their system runs primarily off of politics, and they will not give degrees to individuals based upon accomplishment alone or genius. And they are particularly jealous of persistent geniuses who trample upon their status quo.
    I logged into stackexchange earlier today in order to find you, and so I have an account. While I am not excited about satisfying its community with my efforts (for truly, the accolades of the masses are not a true metric of worth), I am forced to do so in order to access your brain. And so you will see me lurking in that chat room perhaps sooner than you expect.

    1. vznvzn Post author

      aw shucks 😳 JD you have an amusing style. fyi it only takes 4 upvotes on a question on any stackexchange (or eg 4 votes/clicks spread on 4 questions, not exactly the “accolades of the masses”) incl on a topic that may be of interest to you eg bitcoin, philosophy, politics, academia etc, there are many major categories covering most basic human interests and many of the interests that have hard-core fanatics & lots of geeks eg stuff like video games, software/programming, etc 😀

      actually, honorary degrees are indeed awarded by universities in rare/remarkable cases, it would be very interesting to compile this list. eg Steve Jobs! although one might argue while well deserved in that case, its a marketing/publicity coup for the university. your statements remind me of someone who reflects some of your coolness toward academia, Perelman (also cited in the Mad Scientist links at right of blog), some books on him have been meaning to read [& blog on him also]. the links do indeed attempt to honor unorthodox individuals who did not nec. fit into the academic system & politics. 😎

      more musings on this tension between achievement/brilliance vs academic politics/bureacracy in my blog on the recent Zhang twin primes breakthru (aka “what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?”).

      also, have collected a ton of links on big changes going on in university education eg MOOCs & am lying in wait for a good opportune moment to blog on that topic.

  4. JD

    Dear Professor,
    I write in today to request a religious exemption to your assignment. Well, to request an exemption based upon religion, religious matters (morality), and other grounds, even.
    I ran straight to stackexchange to get started. It was like torture. Signing up was easy enough, but all of those flashy graphics scrambled my brain. They should have a shell based stackexchange for the graphically challenged. What if my mouse was not functioning?
    And so, I found myself racing to post answers to technical questions before others. And yet I was too late again and again and again. And so I started to look for categories that maybe contained users with slower fingers. I went to the Christianity section. I saw some questions that I found to be of rather dubious worth, but then I found one that I knew I could answer with confidence. And so I did.
    And would you believe that a moderator or someone showed up right after me to complain? He says that my answer would be a lot better if I could add references showing that it is a common understanding, and who teaches/believes it. He says that they aren’t looking for personal opinions, but rather what groups think.
    And so I ask you, is not his groupthink mandate the direct opposite of good religion? And what is a group? Is it not two or more people? Is it not extremely likely that there’s at least another person in the world who believes as I do, causing even my answer to serve as a “group” answer? Does my Group need a special name? Articles of Organization or something? Isn’t it generally understood that the broad path is to perdition and the narrow path is to God? Doesn’t that in itself suggest that his groupthink mandate (assuming that my Unincorporated and Unnamed group is to be spat upon because of its apparently small size) is in fact simply mandating the promotion of bad ideas?
    If Jesus himself had showed up in the forum, wouldn’t this guy’s mandate find much fault in His so-called “unorthodox” ideas??
    And so you can see how they discriminate against me based upon my religion. And what if religious talk is all that I’m good for? And so you there you see the first plank of my grounds for a religious exemption from said homework assignment.
    The second plank is based upon morality. And temptation. Knowing how frustrated stackexchange makes me (it frustrates me horribly, I say – primarily because points aren’t given for RIGHT answers, but rather for the approval of the public, who I will not refer to as my “peers”)…I have been tempted. I have been tempted to use pseudonymous means to bolster my reputation there on short notice. Various members of the community would probably find such behavior reprehensible. I have also found myself tempted to simply hack in, steal someone’s account, or even buy an account on the deepwebs. I can’t help but feel that your assignment is somewhat responsible. And so I ask, is it right for a Professor to tempt a student to cross moral boundaries with an assignment? And such is a second plank to my grounds for a religious exemption from said homework assignment.
    The third plank is based upon my privacy. I have found that for me to answer expert questions in every category that I am an expert in will no doubt expose me. They will have a perfect profile of my brain. And you can see that I value my anonymity. After answering a few questions, I realized how glaringly obvious it was that it was ME answering them! Already! What if my enemies are watching? Did I not foolishly give stackexchange my costly anonymous e-mail address? What if they can guess? I care more rather than less! And what if they are stalking users based upon their expert knowledge?…for instance, what if they decide to rub out those who know too much about X, Y, or Z?? Even you may find yourself in some danger!!!
    And so as I believe you to understand the value of privacy and anonymity in this messed up world, and as I believe that you are a man with some morals, I hereby respectfully request an exemption from this particular assignment. And yet I still seek what I desire. But then again, if you feel it necessary to hold my head under the water, so to say, then let us both roll in the gutter – me with my actions, and you with your guilt! Let me bust into stackexchange with a million pseudonyms, jack myself up to 10 gazillion points, and then take over the very chat room! You will bear the moral burden for the temptation, and we will Share the glory, as we rise up above the unwashed!!

    1. vznvzn Post author

      ❗ ah geez JD ppl are gonna think am crazy for replying to you now… its not that hard dude … its barely an “assignment”, if there was a way to chat there without doing anything, that would be just fine with me. yes its not reallly about personal opinion at all so that could indeed be a fatal prerequisite in this case….plz do not attempt to subvert their honor system… plz do not post anything more than 1 paragraph here for now…. 🙄

  5. JD

    I respectfully accept my chastisement. Keeping it short: 1.) The public has chosen to accept my forum response regardless of the moderators…and there has been no pseudospoofing. I now have enough points to enter chat. 2.) My Tor browser is apparently not compatible with their chat. There is a question/answer posted regarding it, and it seems that it is a bug. You are the master of persistence, I am only a student. And so I must crawl back into the shadows. Unless you would condescend to using e-mail, in which case you would be welcome to publish our discussion, if you wish. Or we can both wait until I am on a public computer in a big city.

  6. JD

    And so your characteristic difficult-ness has indeed proven that you are you. Some things never change! But now it is time for me to get Religious with you. I will be the Professor for just one moment. When the Elements are Ignited (2 Peter 3:10), all of these scientific efforts will prove to be in vain. Millions of man hours of work, incinerated in a second. And yes, that includes my own scientific contributions. (You see, I am a recovering crackhead scientist.)
    The only question is how much trouble, pain, and suffering we will all go through before the end.
    If only you non-recovering types would seek general and true knowledge, something good could perhaps come of it. But instead, trapped in your tiny world, you do not seem to realize that there are two classes, and you are in the lower one – along with the most simple of ignoramuses – foolishly striving to manufacture the tools that will only be used to forge better chains for yourself and other innocent parties.
    It is up to you to decide whether or not you want Freedom. For a start, I suggest Scientists Anyonmous, a branch of Thinkers Anonymous. And of course I recommend the most ancient coherent book of human history – the one that convinced our Visionary ancestors to learn to read and write.

  7. JD

    And so there it is, David the moderator of (and religious adherent to the bitcult), has “taught me a lesson” by banning me from a site that I detest anyway – a site that I only went to because you forced me. All because, like a low-self esteem donut eater, he demands respect for his AUTH-O-RET-EE! And he decides what’s too “crazy” to be said (fascist censor goon) and what’s not. IE- crazy: bringing doubt to his foolish bitreligion.
    It is a site for self-defined smartypants, with “moderation” apparently provided in the manner of a pre-teen BBS op.
    Well, vzn, what do you say now? Is watching this like Deja Vu for you? Or do you appreciate his “protection”? You know where to find me via e-mail. I guess I can’t go back to that site, because I have a need to say it like it is, or say nothing at all.

  8. JD

    I know you may consider this to be “soiling” of your blog, I truly hope you will not. But I post it for your benefit and for the benefit of others for whom there is still hope. I was going to post onto David’s blog, but that would make me into the fool.

    Wisdom has built her house. She has carved out her seven pillars.
    She has prepared her meat. She has mixed her wine. She has also set her table.
    She has sent out her maidens. She cries from the highest places of the city:

    “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!” As for him who is void of understanding, she says to him,
    “Come, eat some of my bread, Drink some of the wine which I have mixed!
    Leave your simple ways, and live. Walk in the way of understanding.”

    **He who corrects a mocker invites insult. He who reproves a wicked man invites abuse.
    Don’t reprove a scoffer, lest he hate you. Reprove a wise man, and he will love you.**

    Instruct a wise man, and he will be still wiser. Teach a righteous man, and he will increase in learning.
    The fear of Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom. The knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

    For by me your days will be multiplied. The years of your life will be increased.
    If you are wise, you are wise for yourself. If you mock, you alone will bear it.
    The foolish woman is loud, Undisciplined, and knows nothing.
    She sits at the door of her house, on a seat in the high places of the city,
    To call to those who pass by, who go straight on their ways,

    “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here.” as for him who is void of understanding, she says to him,
    “Stolen water is sweet. Food eaten in secret is pleasant.”

    But he doesn’t know that the dead are there, that her guests are in the depths of Sheol.

  9. JD

    Like kibo, I’m drawn to return to the places where I am mentioned. As I have been censored at the stackexchange bitcult, I figure this is a great blog topic to post under. I only return to answer your allegations/questions:
    A.) I am not a near religious fundamentalist. I am a complete and unashamed Christian Fundamentalist.
    B.) Don’t have any problem with most technology, just bad technology. When the internet started, there was real conversation and what you may call “low technology”. Now there’s fancy new glitzy updates every near, and the internet is full of stupid talk, which mirrors perfectly your “reality television”. Even YOU admittedly put up with a rebooting browser just to type some text. I don’t believe you had those issues back in 1995. Who has time for this? I also have a problem with foolish scientists putting dangerous technology, technology which has little general and beneficial use, into the hands of their so-called “leaders”, individuals who are obviously the worst of characters. All done for a pat on the head.
    C.) Not interested in David’s blogs or reading more trash on the bitcult. If you haven’t figured it out yet, I already know plenty about it – more than most.

    I am sorry your society has degraded so much that it went from centuries of reforming Christianity into “enlightened” idiocy, where so-called smartness is defined by a fundamental disbelief in the Lord and a lust to believe anything else, no matter how ridiculous. Go into the big city, go to the library. Are the shelves covered with books of genius, ancient books of renown? Or is it Danielle Steele and vampires? Go ask the guy running the cash register at the convenience store whether or not he believes in the Lord. Take a survey amongst the simple folk of the city. You will find that the “masses” all believe the same thing that the “NPR scientists” believe. How is this the case? Maybe the sheeple have been grazing at the same trough? Their disbelief is nothing special, nothing scientific. They did not come up with it on their own from deep reflection. They stupidly follow what they are spoon fed, and like a mass of brainless lemmings, they do what they are told. Are you one of them? Do you believe that this country is run by those who are “trying to make the world a better place” or that it is the unwashed masses who are putting in “representatives” for their best interest? Do you believe that mercury becomes a life-giving elixir once your medical priestess blesses it? That your sodium fluoride, once labeled simply as “rat poison”, was put in your water because the government wants you to have a nice smile? (Review trough and lemming sections.)

    Just like David, people need to grow up. You are all part of the problem. You can’t seriously believe that this world will go on without a hitch as you feed more and more power to your psychopathic leaders. That there will be a lovely Star Trek future where humanity will go on and on, up and up! You may not have the insight to see it yet, but your days of science and technology are numbered. If you make it to 2100, then I’ll be rather surprised indeed. But one thing is for sure…you’ll be SLAVES looong before and you will know it!

    vzn 1999: “Can I talk on the telephone without having you listen, Massa?”
    Massa: “No, dog, be grateful that you can talk at all!”
    vzn 2011: “Can I travel without you stripping me and my womenfolk naked, whopping us with radiation, and groping our bodies, Massa?”
    Massa: “Radiation is harmless. It always has been. And my goons NEED a bit of feely grab throughout their day, dog! Not to mention that it reminds you of your place!”
    vzn 2015: “Massa, I’m at the office all day. Food is so expensive, shelter is too. Must you take so much of my money?”
    Massa: “Get a dictionary and look up the definition of slave, Slave!”
    vzn 2020: “Massa, can I have a pea shooter to hunt some bunny for my dinner? I am so hungry.”
    Massa: “No, dog, you might put your eye out (or mine)!”
    vzn 2028: “Massa, I have cancer from that chip you put in me. Can I have treatment?”
    Massa: “No, dog, you’re approaching your expiration date. Make room for the next slave.”

  10. JD

    Regarding your latest correspondence:
    1.) No, I’m not sure why it is that my e-mails are having a problem getting through. Could be a problem with your spam engine. Some of my friends using providers like yours seem to also have a problem.
    2.) No, there aren’t any hard feelings for calling me a kook. I’ve been called worse and I take it in stride. I think you’re a tiny bit kooky yourself, in a good way of course – and I still respect your achievements. I believe that we will come to understand each other a little better as we get to know each other more.
    3.) Yes, I understand how difficult it can be for those with a vested interest to be objective enough to consider the failings of bitcoin. Don’t get me wrong, I like it and use it myself, as I have said. But we have to be rational creatures. Blinding ourselves to its flaws will only hurt us and others in the long run. It will destroy the cause. I know how easy it is to be drawn into having “hope” regarding a solution to the bankers’ economic stranglehold. But the people who are best equipped at fighting it (the bitcult, as I have called them) need to get the stars out of their eyes and knuckle down in order to win this fight.
    4.) And no, we don’t have to make it all religious “just yet”. There’s plenty to talk about before we get into that.

  11. Pingback: collatz codegolf adventures, stackexchange “collective intelligence” realized | Turing Machine

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s