logs archiveChat DB / Freenode / #programming / 2015 / November / 5 / 20
pyon
nom nom
n1751
hahahahahaha, i thought that was like a forum, that if you make a mistake you will die in few days hahahahahaha
E4xoi
hihi
n1751
anyway, someone that know somethings about cheating on ps3?
thecha
rindolf i sovled it
:)
pyon
n1751: Aaah, no idea. :-p
E4xoi
n1751: if there's anything we talk about in this channel, it's mostly unrelated to programming
pyon
E4xoi: lol
pewpau
so is our trust in formal logic based on trust and experience? (question may not make any sense but begs to be corrected :p)
pyon
pewpau: that's right
Twey
pewpau: Ultimately, yes, we just have to fix a foundation and hope.
thecha
is trust based on trust?
Twey
pewpau: That's how mathematics works.
pyon
pewpau: Logics are *defined* formally, but *justified* by intuition.
Twey
Formal or informal.
quux
it's not just hope though we have thousands of years of history
where people have been doing mathematics and trying to understand the deeper principles behind the reasoning used
n1751
guys, there is someone that know about cheating on battlefield 3 for ps3?
E4xoi
talkin' about that, I <3 proving things for the lulz
jontxu
Cheaters are lame
Twey
quux: Sure. But that's not a proof. We have good reason to believe that our logics are consistent, but no proof.
adsc
pewpau: I guess your "faith" in anything science related increases when you can see it applied correctly in the real world
Twey
quux: And, you know, Russell's paradox is only about fifty years old.
E4xoi
I used like, 10-15 pages for a "complicated" proof, basically using like 3 isomorphisms to achieve what I wanted
n1751
i know jont, but i need help about this..
Twey
quux: Okay, a hundred apparently
E4xoi
realized it could be simplified to 1-2 pages if I did in other way :P
adsc
pewpau: I wouldn't really call it faith, though, because unlike faith, the trust in science can actually be reinforced and shattered
Twey
Russell is older than I thought!
adsc
because science deals with the real world
and if the real world proves science wrong, it corrects itself
pewpau
adsc: yeah. I thought "some degree of faith", or rather 'trust' should I say.
thecha
does it evry prove science wrong or jsut a theory
pewpau
adsc: can we trust the proving methods etc. Nothing is certain
thecha
i mean science is more like amethod than something oyu can disprove
adsc
yes, for advanced science, you can't keep all proofs in mind
thecha
it is a way to arrive at theories
no?
Twey
thecha: Science itself (i.e. the empirical method) is not disprovable. But individual theories and applications can be and often are disproved.
adsc
thecha: you are right, i meant scientific theories
Anduin
So, I'm using a switch case in c++ controlled by an integer.
I have cases 1-4. and a default case for number 0,5-9
thecha
maybe i am wrong and you can prove that sciecne itself is garbage but i mean we already accept that whatever we know is jsut the best fit so far and not the abolute truth
pewpau
adsc: yeah, even that. Let's say that something is "proven". You still have to work with some assumptions, assume that someone else has proven X on which your work relies on. One example is the mass of oxygen.
Anduin
It works fine when the input in any of these numbers, but breaks when the user inputs any letters
thecha
no?
Twey
thecha: No, science is not disprovable, at least with our current understanding
Anduin
What are some ways to fix this?
pewpau
the "definition" of science change all the time
adsc
pewpau: yes, that's true...you can never make the whole chain down to the basic assertions
GeDaMo
Anduin: show code
Twey
pewpau: Science never proves anything. Proof is a rational concept, not an empirical one. Science can offer evidence for/against a proposition, but not a proof.
boodllebat
I have weird question , i have few projects/ideas (for learning purpose and all of them belong to me so no deadline / pressure ) , what should i do for better productivity work on all of them simultaneously or should i complete one and then switch to another project ?
Twey
Anduin: Check for errors when parsing.
adsc
pewpau: or at least I can't, maybe some less humble minds can
Anduin
GeDaMo: The code is a little sensitive... heheheh....
pewpau
Twey: true
Anduin
What happens is my switch case control variable is an int
GeDaMo
Anduin: in what way does it break?
Anduin
And the cases and default work fine for when the input is 0-9
But when a letter is entered, it basically runs my for loop over and over again
Twey
Anduin: If it's user (console) input, it starts out life as a string, and you parse it into an int.
Anduin
Really?
adsc
Twey: what other notion of "prove" is there that makes you say science can't prove anything?
Anduin
I tried making it into a string, but switch case doesnt like that
Twey
Anduin: Presumably with >>, since you seem confused about where you've done that
GeDaMo
Anduin: without seeing your code, we can only guess
quux
important scientific principles are evidence and disprovable hypotheses that inform expriments - since we understand that mathematical logic can only be reduced so far down to foundations after which it isn't effective any longere, we must apply scientific principles to foundations
Anduin
Yeah, I didn't know that all user inputs started as strings
let me modify it a bit
adsc
well, there are always basic assumptions
it gets very philosophical if you go deeper
Twey
adsc: Precisely that one: to prove a proposition P (in a logic L) is to provide a derivation (in L) that starts with an empty set of assumptions and ends in P
quux
alternatively you can think of it all as a game, statements and claims are the pieces and laws of deduction are the rules
adsc
Twey: is that the rational or the empirical "proof"?
Twey
adsc: Rational. Empirical proof is a non-concept, and professional empiricists avoid the word.
Anduin
http://pastebin.com/tSs4Vk7y
adsc
yes, that's what I wanted to hear
but then if you think like that, I don't understand what you said that science can never prove anything
Anduin
There's normally text in the cout, of course
GeDaMo
Anduin: where's the loop?
Twey
adsc: Why?
Anduin
Loop is for (int i = 100; i > 0; i= i)
Twey
adsc: Science is (by definition) empirical, not rational
GeDaMo
Anduin: i = i?
Anduin
So what happens is, the i incrementors is inside the case switch
adsc
Twey: ah, I get it
thecha
can you write a c++ function that will post the output of a softwar to the corrct PE problem page?
Anduin
and because it doesn't go through case switch, it just runs the for loop over and over
GeDaMo
Anduin: there's no update of i in the default case
Anduin
It has a break though. Again, if I entered in 9, it would stop the loop and request another input
thecha
it takes argv[0] and uses that to fidn the proper poblem page and to enter into the entry field?
Anduin
If I enter in e, it doesn't take it to default, cause it's not even an int I guess, and just skips it.
Twey
thecha: Yes, I can.
Anduin
If it evers gets into default, it would break.
And I actually mean break from the loop.
thecha
how many lines of code would that take oyu?
GeDaMo
Anduin: break is only breaking out of the switch, not the loop
Twey
Anduin: if (!cin), the parsing into int failed, and you should request the user to enter a number again
« prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 next »