Ciro Santilli @cirosantilli 37

Example: llvm/hello.ll adapted from: llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#module-structure but without double newline.

To execute it as mentioned at github.com/dfellis/llvm-hello-world we can either use their crazy assembly interpreter, tested on Ubuntu 22.10:This seems to use puts from the C standard library.

Or we can Lower it to assembly of the local machine:which produces:and then we can assemble link and run with gcc:or with clang:hello.s uses the GNU GAS format, which clang is highly compatible with, so both should work in general.

TODO. I think this is the key point. Notably, $U(1)$ symmetry implies charge conservation.

More precisely, each generator of the corresponding Lie algebra leads to one separate conserved current, such that a single symmetry can lead to multiple conserved currents.

This is basically the local symmetry version of Noether's theorem.

Then to maintain charge conservation, we have to maintain local symmetry, which in turn means we have to add a gauge field as shown at Video "Deriving the qED Lagrangian by Dietterich Labs (2018)".

Forces can then be seen as kind of a side effect of this.

Bibliography:

Same motivation as Galilean invariance, but relativistic version of that: we want the laws of physics to have the same form on all inertial frames, so we really want to write them in a way that is Lorentz covariant.

This is just the relativistic version of that which takes the Lorentz transformation into account instead of just the old Galilean transformation.

There are several choices of electromagnetic four-potential that lead to the same physics.

E.g. thinking about the electric potential alone, you could set the zero anywhere, and everything would remain be the same.

The Lorentz gauge is just one such choice. It is however a very popular one, because it is also manifestly Lorentz invariant.

The equation that allows us to calculate stuff in special relativity!

Take two observers with identical rules and stopwatch, and aligned axes, but one is on a car moving at towards the $+x$ direction at speed $v$.

TODO image.

When both observe an event, if we denote:It is of course arbitrary who is standing and who is moving, we will just use the term "standing" for the one without primes.

Then the coordinates of the event observed by the observer on the car are:where:

Note that if $\frac{v}{c}$ tends towards zero, then this reduces to the usual Galilean transformations which our intuition expects:

This explains why we don't observe special relativity in our daily lives: macroscopic objects move too slowly compared to light, and $\frac{v}{c}$ is almost zero.

For Ciro Santilli's campaign for freedom of speech in China: Section "github.com/cirosantilli/china-dictatorship".

Ciro has the radical opinion that absolute freedom of speech must be guaranteed by law for anyone to talk about absolutely anything, anonymously if they wish, with the exception only of copyright-related infringement.

And Ciro believes that there should be no age restriction of access to any information.

People should be only be punished for actions that they actually do in the real world. Not even purportedly planning those actions must be punished. Access and ability to publish information must be completely and totally free.

If you don't like someone, you should just block them, or start your own campaign to prepare a counter for whatever it is that they are want to do.

This freedom does not need to apply to citizens and organizations of other countries, only to citizens of the country in question, since foreign governments can create influence campaigns to affect the rights of your citizens. More info at: cirosantilli.com/china-dictatorship/mark-government-controlled-social-media

Limiting foreign influence therefore requires some kind of nationality check, which could harm anonymity. But Ciro believes that almost certainly such checks can be carried out in anonymous blockchain consensus based mechanisms. Governments would issues nationality tokens, and tokens are used for anonymous confirmations of rights in a way that only the token owner, not even the government, can determine who used the token. E.g. something a bit like what Monero does. Rights could be checked on a once per account basis, or yearly basis, so transaction costs should not be a big issue. Maybe expensive proof-of-work systems can be completely bypassed to the existence of this central token authority?

Some people believe that freedom of speech means "freedom of speech that I agree with". Those people should move to China or some other dictatorship.

Related: cirosantilli.com/china-dictatorship/hate-speech

Related projects:

There are 3: real numbers, complex numbers and quaternions.

Notably, the octonions are not associative.

Amazing talk by Richard Feynman that describes his experiences at Los Alamos National Laboratory while developing the first nuclear weapons.

Transcript: calteches.library.caltech.edu/34/3/FeynmanLosAlamos.htm Also included full text into Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman.

Ciro Santilli tried to add this example to Wikipedia, but it was reverted, so here we are, see also: Section "Deletionism on Wikipedia".

This is a good first example of a field of a finite field of non-prime order, this one is a prime power order instead.

$4=2^2$, so one way to represent the elements of the field will be the to use the 4 polynomials of degree 1 over GF(2):

Note that we refer in this definition to anther field, but that is fine, because we only refer to fields of prime order such as GF(2), because we are dealing with prime powers only. And we have already defined fields of prime order easily previously with modular arithmetic.

Over GF(2), there is only one irreducible polynomial of degree 2:

Addition is defined element-wise with modular arithmetic modulo 2 as defined over GF(2), e.g.:

Multiplication is done modulo $X^2+X+1$, which ensures that the result is also of degree 1.

For example first we do a regular multiplication:

Without modulo, that would not be one of the elements of the field anymore due to the $1X^2$!

So we take the modulo, we note that:and by the definition of modulo:which is the final result of the multiplication.

TODO show how taking a reducible polynomial for modulo fails. Presumably it is for a similar reason to why things fail for the prime case.

The fundamental insight of Git design is: a SHA represents not only current state, but also the full history due to the Merkle tree implementation, see notably:

This makes it so that you will always notice if you are overwriting history on the remote, even if you are developing from two separate local computers (or more commonly, two people in two different local computers) and therefore will never lose any work accidentally.

It is very hard to achieve that without the Merkle tree.

Consider for example the most naive approach possible of marking versions with consecutive numbers:

If Local 1 were to push to Remote first, how could Local 2 notice that when it tries to push itself? The navie method of just checking: "does Remote have commit "2"" does not work, because Local 2 has a different version of commit 2 than local 1.

By GitHub around Black Lives Matter, due to a possible ludicrous relationship with slavery of black people:For the love of God, the word "master" is much more general than black slavery. If you are going to ban it, you might as well ban the word "evil".

Several software projects followed the purge from their codebases, maybe GitHub followed someone else's lead, it's hard to say.

The words "whitelist" and "blacklist" were also targeted.