Right, and Cauchy is the person we have to thank for Bayes’ Theorem, and of course Euler, De Moivre, Poisson and Gauss for the Gaussian integral[1]. You can’t really get figures more central to mathematics than that.
[1] Athough Gauss apparently credited it to Laplace.
Neo4j looooooves the "if you think about it, everything is graphs!" marketing maneuver. They (their marketing department) were the very first thing I thought of when I read this headline.
It doesn't matter. The first point raised was essentially"well the dice were just part of a belief system about divinity so they could not have been more sophisticated than that" and then I said that the article's logical reasoning is actually more interesting than that kind of kneejerk dismissal. Just that one line of thought mentioned in the article is intrinsically interesting, because it posits a kind of forcing argument, that if there is evidence for complexity behavior then there is evidence for complex thought required of it. That is an interesting cognitive science kind of argument, different than a flat argument of the type "oh their belief system would have prevented them from developing it".
The US Department of War does not take full advantage of its name. Declaring a war has real legal and political consequences which presumably are not appealing to the current US administration.
I had no idea they actually changed the domain name. Reminds me of Musk wanting it to be X because it sounded tougher. Something about trying to appear tough seems to make me think those people are less tough. I'm sure there's some famous paradox in that.
...now it is complete
reply