Vector Calculus of Argument

and so I must say: I agree

(Maybe I should stop posting things based on dreams I remember at 3AM)


  1. We might be at the limits of what vector calc can tell us about debate, but I think there's still plenty of room for vector calc jokes.

    If only I hadn't flunked math...

  2. your mom is... uh... an orthonormal basis of principle components explaining 95% of the variance in the data.

  3. ok there were some math jokes at the G20 protest, dang nerds :

    "Support vector machines !"
    "Safer data mining !"
    "Protect Our Axiom of Choice !"
    "FREE Variables !"
    "Bayseans Against Discrimination !"
    "Ban genetic algorithms !"
    "End Duality Gap !"

    ... yes

  4. you might think you are at the limits of what vectors can explain...

    but i recall seeing from Jacob a study where they took all the votes by all the senators and plotted them in a gigantic space and then did PCA...

    They discover not surprisingly perhaps that the top vector is roughly corresponding to economic issues, and the second vector is roughly corresponding to social issues, and that these two components determine the vast majority of the variance.

    Of course I'm inclined to argue that Linear Algebra covers at least 80% of science that exists.

    Also as usual the pictures make less sense than the math -- a-b / 2 and a+b / 2 are the same no matter what basis you choose to operate in? so changing the basis makes no material difference?

    More general question about "religios": if someone told you that, they prefer only to hire people that go to the same church as them, would you be outraged? I have family members that say that they do this -- its not such a big deal it seems because they run a local business with only a few people anyway. The justification is a little stranger -- they think that, knowing that they go to the same church means they are more likely to be honest, so that being religious serves as a character witness.

    I mean, I also think it would be outrageous for someone to say, I won't hire religious individuals because they are more likely to be stupid. Its a good thing for the religios that the rest of the world doesn't decide to play tit for tat... I suppose one side occupies the moral high ground?

  5. Yeah, the metaphor was incomplete. The idea was that you only have so much energy, and you can either fight or apply it toward your common goals, and well which place would you rather end up ?
    Stuck in a useless argument, or just not talking about it and going to feed the poor ?

  6. I actually think I'd be more upset if someone refused to hire someone on the grounds that they were religious, but I absolutely can not explain that impulse at the moment.