Thanks - just tried gnovies and got a great recommendation.

I'm surprised that something I'd never heard of appears to work that well.

It's true that talent is almost entirely curiosity/enthusiasm/drive.

But that curiosity/enthusiasm/drive has a large genetic component - like every pretty much every other individual characteristic that humans exhibit.

Onshape is wonderful. Free users complained a lot about the changes to the free license years ago when they changed the rules, but I have no issue with it. TBH, I'm grateful they make it available on the terms that they do.

Solvespace is beautiful, but limited.

I spent enough time using FreeCad to get the hang of the user interface, but got enormously frustrated by it more or less randomly crashing and frequently generating bizarre shapes due to numerical issues when trying to do things like complex lofts. I have had no similar problems with OnShape.

I honestly don't know why there was so much noise about 'topological naming' in FreeCad, the stability issues I kept running into were way more frustrating than the clunky UI or counter-intuitiveness.

I did think about digging into FreeCad to fix some of the issues I was having, but once I started playing around with OnShape I totally lost interest. I am a lot more interested in designing parts than in debugging and fixing stability issues in complicated software in my spare time.

I am quite interested in trying out dune3d. It looks like the author has some expertise and interesting ideas about what's wrong with the other free CAD options.

Nice work!

Cool that you made this available for other people to benefit from.

This looks nice. Looking forward to going through it and the related earlier stuff carefully at leisure.

I'm sure the author is well aware, but Lennart Augustsson wrote a really nice blog post responding to the original "Simply Easy!" in 2007 that was a lot more fun and simple than the "Simply Easy" paper.

http://augustss.blogspot.com/2007/10/simpler-easier-in-recen...

I'm not bob, but I bought a ruixin pro 8 (~40AUD) and 3 diamond stones (~5AUD a piece) on aliexpress a couple of weeks ago.

Watched a YouTube video and got half a dozen kitchen knives sharp enough to shave arm hair in about an hour. They seem to be holding their edges reasonably well a couple of weeks later.

I'd previously not had much success with Japanese water stones and with the lansky(?) gadget.

It seems like the key part of the process is (a) detecting when you have formed a burr so you know when to change sides/move to the next grit and (b) stropping at the end (get the leather strip with polishing wax).

The Chinese gadget is a bit crude but was honestly surprisingly effective.

I don't think the theory is that complicated but getting good practical results reliably can be a bit tricky. The gadget seems to work quite well for that.

Ps: Just looked at Cliff Stamp's sharpening site. I think that's an order of magnitude sharper than I was going for with my kitchen knives.

You may already be aware of it, but jupytext solves most of the problems ipynb files cause.

Nice.

I would not pay for this but might buy it as an app on my phone.

I would be more likely to buy a subscription of you had a ton of decks on it like memrise does.

Yes, that is a valid point! From my experience the card creating process is also really valuable and forces you to distill the information down to something concrete.

But I totally get you, that for something like learning a language it would be nice to have some predefined decks.

I hope Turkey does what you're suggesting with lighting.

There's also an ayasofya in trebizond that was converted back to a mosque in 2013. That building is still open for visitors but unfortunately the main dome and its mosaics are now obscured by barriers put up during the conversion.

It would be a trajedy if the same thing happens in Istanbul. Hopefully it's enough of a tourist attraction that it doesn't happen.

Ayasofya is an incredibly impressive and beautiful building. There's nothing else like it in the world (even though it was a major influence on subsequent buildings for a thousand years.) Far more beautiful than European churches.

The parent comment is the most useful one in the thread so far for anyone who seriously wants to learn about quantitative trading.

Sports betting is essentially the same thing as proprietary trading in financial markets. The paper gives a good summary of a technique that was very successful in its day.

There is very little publicly available material on quantitative techniques that are useful for proprietary trading. Lo and Mackinlay's "non-random walk down wall st" was good, but that's 20 years old.

The mathematical literature on gambling is a lot more accessible. It's also probably easier to consistently make at least small money gambling, because the barriers to entry are lower.