The complex analogue of the special orthogonal group, i.e. the subgroup of the unitary group with determinant equals exactly 1 instead of an arbitrary complex number with absolute value equal 1 as is the case for the unitary group.
Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.
An IBM made/pushed term, but that matches Ciro Santilli's general view of how we should move forward AGI.
Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman chapter Alfred Nobel's Other Mistake by 
Ciro Santilli 37 Updated 2025-07-16
Ciro Santilli 37 Updated 2025-07-16Key quote that names the chapter:
My friend Matt Sands was once going to write a book to be called Alfred Nobel's Other Mistake.
Intel supercomputer market share from 1993 to 2020
. Source. This graph is shocking, they just took over the entire market! Some good pre-Intel context at The Supermen: The Story of Seymour Cray by Charles J. Murray (1997), e.g. in those earlier days, custom architectures like Cray's and many others dominated.TODO clear attribution source:
Some people say, "Give the customers what they want." But that's not my approach. Our job is to figure out what they're going to want before they do. I think Henry Ford once said, "If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have told me, 'A faster horse!'" People don't know what they want until you show it to them. That's why I never rely on market research. Our task is to read things that are not yet on the page.
In the standard formulation of Maxwell's equations, the electric current is a convient but magic input.
Would it be possible to use Maxwell's equations to solve a system of pointlike particles such as electrons instead?
The following suggest no, or only for certain subcases less general than Maxwell's equations:
This is the type of thing where the probability aspect of quantum mechanics seems it could "help".
This is a good approach. The downside is that while you are developing the implementation and testing interactively you might notice that the requirements are wrong, and then the tests have to change.
One intermediate approach Ciro Santilli likes is to do the implementation and be happy with interactive usage, then create the test, make it pass, then remove the code that would make it pass, and see it fail. This does have a risk that you will forget to test something, but Ciro finds it is a worth it generally. Unless it really is one of those features that you are unable to develop without an automated test, generally more "logical/mathematical" stuff. This is a sort of laziness Driven Development.
There are unlisted articles, also show them or only show them.