Follows the "certified teacher only" approach which is in Ciro Santilli's opinion a fatal flaw of most elearning systems out there, OurBigBook.com won't suffer from that!
But that is a very, very good project.
All notes appear to have been extracted from existing notes, as noted on the bottom of each page.
Appears to have mixed licenses. E.g.:
- phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/Book%3A_University_Physics_(OpenStax)/Book%3A_University_Physics_III_-_Optics_and_Modern_Physics_(OpenStax)/06%3A_Photons_and_Matter_Waves/6.06%3A_De_Broglies_Matter_Waves is CC BY
- but we had seen another one that was CC BY-NC-SA
- phys.libretexts.org/Courses/University_of_California_Davis/UCD%3A_Physics_9HE_-_Modern_Physics/06%3A_Emission_and_Absorption_of_Photons/6.1%3A_Transitions_Between_Stationary_States CC BY-SA
- chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Chemistry/Introductory_Chemistry_(CK-12) uses the custom "CK-12 license" which seems a bit like CC BY-NC-SA
- some don't even have a free license, e.g.: phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Quantum_Mechanics/Quantum_Mechanics_(Fowler)/00%3A_Front_Matter/04%3A_Licensing
TODO how does it work exactly? Do they ask for permission from authors in every case, including when the content has open license? Or when it has open license, do they just do it? In some cases, the notes have no license, so they must have asked.
TODO what is the source code that authors write? LaTeX or something else? LaTeX feels extremely likely given that it is what most original materials were already written in.
They are attempting a "model up this entire university" thing: phys.libretexts.org/Courses which is good. E.g. they have a bunch of "quantum mechanics ones under: phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Quantum_Mechanics
Appears to be UC Davies-based mostly.
They claim to use this closed source backend: www.nice.com/resources/cxone-expert-knowledge-management? Seriously? For a publicly funded project with low-tech requirements?? It is mind blowing.
Some issues:
- the internal cross references are somewhat broken as of 2022.
- their URLs are HUGE! All components of every ancestor are in it. E.g. check this out: phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Quantum_Mechanics/Introductory_Quantum_Mechanics_(Fitzpatrick)/12%3A_Time-Dependent_Perturbation_Theory/12.13%3A_Forbidden_Transitions Insane.
OK let's database it:
Unknown real developer name, claims to be from Canada on YouTube channel about: www.youtube.com/@TheBibitesDigitalLife/about, likely because he's a software developer and wants to keep his employer's claws away from his side project.
Appears to be closed source unfortunately, so not suitable for research.
Video 1. "What will happen after 100h of evolution? by The Bibites (2022)" mentions it was started five years ago, so circa 2017.
Appears to be Unity-based, if you download and extract for Linux you get files named
UnityPlayer.so.Author is named Leo Caussan in game credits at startup: www.linkedin.com/in/l%C3%A9o-caussan-560350136/, a Canadian software engineer.
Was not very Linux compatible: www.reddit.com/r/TheBibites/comments/vqk6ac/program_stalls_at_a_blue_screen/ Trying to run 0.5.0 leads to a blank screen after you click "start simulation".
What will happen after 100h of evolution? by The Bibites (2022)
Source. A discussion on the Lean Zulip: leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/113488-general/topic/The.20Math.20Genome.20Project/near/352639129. Lean people are not convinced about the model in general it seems however.
TODO closed source? Really? www.themathgenome.com/pricing
TODO not viewable without login?
Has conjectures feature.
Built by this dude John Mercer: www.linkedin.com/in/johnmercer/. He must be independently wealthy or something? What a hero.
A failed Hacker News self post: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35775071
Ciro Santilli asked: discord.com/channels/1096393420408360989/1096393420408360996/1137047842159079474Owner:So apparently there will be proof checking, but nodependencies between proofs, you still have to pull request everywhing back and face the pain.
Does the website actually automatically check the formal proofs, or is this intended to be implemented at some point? And if yes, is it intended to allow proofs to depend on other proofs of the website (possibly by other people)
Hi Ciro, yes we will be releasing in-browser proof assistant environments/checkers (e.g. Lean). Our goal is not to replace the underlying open-source repos (e.g. Mathlib) so the main dependency will be on the current repos; then when statement formalizations and proofs come in and are certified they can be PR'd to the respective repos. So we will be the source of truth for the informal latex code but only a stepping stone and orchestration layer on the way to the respective formal libraries.