The answer is to use one of the "hidden variable" interpretations of quantum mechanics. Bell's experiments have ruled out local hidden variables, but hidden variables that violate locality are still permitted. Since this function takes the global state of the universe (hidden variables included) as its input and returns a new one for its output, there is no restriction for locality, so it remains consistent. Whether its philosophically fulfilling is left as an exercise to the reader.
It doesn't have to be random - you can take a many-worlds interpretation where there is a "block history" that just branches into branches with a certain "mass", and the Born probabilities are just the subjective probabilities of finding ourselves in one Everett branch or another.
Oh great, now we're gonna have language hipsters referring to their functions as "mise en abyme" instead of just saying "recursive" like we've been doing for the past 40 years.
In french we also have "recursion" but it's not used for the same proposes. "Mise en abyme" is used for art or something visual and recursion when it's about logic.
Quite interesting, I ended up just staring at the timer and moving the mouse to the other side of the screen for the first version. And side to side for the 3rd
You dont't have to be French to not see the value of this link. I'm an Australian, living in Germany with a Chinese ancestry and I can't see how this is HN relevant.
French is not my native language, however the wikipedia link adds absolutely nothing to what I already knew. And don't get me wrong, I don't claim to "have total understanding of a concept".
Hey guys, the Wikipedia article didn't teach BanzaiTokyo anything new -- can we start making sure every article is selected just for him from now on? Thanks.
Frankly, when you look at the thread, you should be putting him on notice, not me. I said the comment was ridiculous and I stand by that statement. So, where did I call him a name exactly? The guy wastes all of our time saying that he doesn't think the link should be posted because he didn't learn anything from it. Get your priorities in order for what constitutes a substantial post, please.
The "but he did it" defense doesn't work on HN, since people have to follow the rules whether someone else does or not.
But your flagged comment was obviously personally rude, and therefore much worse than what the other person posted. No matter how ridiculous someone's opinion is, if you can't comment civilly and substantively, please don't post here.
I agree with you about the article. In fact I was the moderator who boosted it (as described at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380 and the links back from there.) But all that is secondary to the need to be civil, which the life of the community depends on.
You continue to misunderstand and misconstrue my points. I don't see this going anywhere as, ultimately, you're the mod, not me. I hope he continues to leave useless posts complaining about articles he doesn't personally like, since that's what you seem to appreciate. I'll just note that I did, in fact, call his post ridiculous, but explained why immediately. It wasn't an insult in a vacuum. And when he replied with a similarly absurd follow up, I used sarcasm to get my point across. I was never rude for the sake of being rude. His comment bred any incivility which followed, and that's not "but he did it" -- it's just a fact.
>he continues to leave useless posts complaining about articles he doesn't personally like
I just wanted to share that for a French speaker (not even for a native French speaker) the phrase "mise en abyme" is very familiar. So there is nothing about me personally not liking the article.
(as a French speaker,) I'm not sure to agree with the comments that associate "mise en abyme" with recursivity.
For me, examples of mise en abyme is a film shot in a movie, or story read from a book in a book. In CS, it means a function called from another function ... which is not necessarily recursivity :)
"recursion" is calling a function from itself. You usually want this to terminate at some point, though, and thus will have some kind of branching, so it's not "en abyme".
That was also my first thought, but after consideration, there's more to "mise en abyme" than simply placing a story within another.
I think in France everyone learns this term at least in high school, specifically applied to literature, and the way I was taught is that something in the inner story reflects something in the outer story. So for example, you'd talk about the "mise en abyme" of a specific relationship between two characters. This brings it a bit closer to self-similar recursion, but I agree it's still quite different and generally not about fully self-referential concepts (IMO Wikipedia goes a bit over the top in that regard).
Oh Wikipedia, wrong in the very first sentence. "Mise" can indeed mean "placed", but here it's a kind of gerund and means "placing". (I looked for a Wikipedia reference to describe how this aspect of French grammar works, but all I can find is http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/fr-nouns-formed-from-...)
62 comments
[ 0.24 ms ] story [ 114 ms ] threada proper mise en abyme btw
http://hopfog.com/screenception
takes minute sip of $40 ristretto
To see what I am talking about, imagine instead of the link this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursion
But your flagged comment was obviously personally rude, and therefore much worse than what the other person posted. No matter how ridiculous someone's opinion is, if you can't comment civilly and substantively, please don't post here.
I agree with you about the article. In fact I was the moderator who boosted it (as described at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380 and the links back from there.) But all that is secondary to the need to be civil, which the life of the community depends on.
I just wanted to share that for a French speaker (not even for a native French speaker) the phrase "mise en abyme" is very familiar. So there is nothing about me personally not liking the article.
Please read and follow the HN guideline about not calling names:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
For me, examples of mise en abyme is a film shot in a movie, or story read from a book in a book. In CS, it means a function called from another function ... which is not necessarily recursivity :)
I think in France everyone learns this term at least in high school, specifically applied to literature, and the way I was taught is that something in the inner story reflects something in the outer story. So for example, you'd talk about the "mise en abyme" of a specific relationship between two characters. This brings it a bit closer to self-similar recursion, but I agree it's still quite different and generally not about fully self-referential concepts (IMO Wikipedia goes a bit over the top in that regard).