Jon Schoning

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@nuttycom Sometimes "I think" is intended to communicate that you're not willing to advance a full categorical imperative because you acknowledge you don't have all the necessary information so justify such a position. It's a trade of presenting certainty for preserving your credibility.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@vbhvsgr F# and Elm have a lot in common

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@128_mhz Many try to pick up Haskell by random bits and pieces, which also seems to be the trend looking at the other responses to your question.
I believe these days, the best start for a thorough understanding is via https://t.co/zh6usk91qt

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@IAmTimNguyen @ericweinstein @briankeating It was briefly mentioned https://t.co/Kv6Ui0I7t4

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@matthewstoller > "their penchant for borrowing and speculating were putting Robinhood at risk"
RH is not legally allowed to use money in customers' accounts to put up collateral; they must pull from their own cash reserves—this is true even the customer isn't borrowing or trading on margin.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@matthewstoller define "cheating" for us again, please?

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@seanmcarroll Would this result reveal any experimental differences between Everettian and Copenhagen QM?

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@mtaibbi To clarify the second point, perhaps it's not only less credentialed gamblers involved: https://t.co/5LuubOiBHT

[Matt Stoller @matthewstoller]

Here's what's likely happening. Robinhood takes market orders where Redditers say they want to buy stock at 'the market price.' RH sells orders to Citadel. Citadel sees the orders, makes side bets on options. Citadel then sets an arbitrary 'market price' to cash in on options.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@fimoculous spimes

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@shajra https://t.co/FwW75NcfVM https://t.co/hNFjNeeSK9
https://t.co/f6jX5svQOt
https://t.co/XoVImxacIq

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@jkachmar I'm not sure exactly what features little snitch has. Is it the same as https://t.co/BnvmbKP4a9 ?

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@seanmcarroll Why need "X" be a formal definition here? Maybe groups are just embedded in networks and it's expected for internal vs external perception of those to be different.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@ProgrammerDude Probably fine in an application, but I wouldn't like to see this in a library.

[Will Kinney @WKCosmo]

Well this was an interesting poll.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@ProgrammerDude @jkachmar you're creating an argument about haskell-style implementations that i'm not even making at all. I think we're talking past each other, so lets end this here.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@ProgrammerDude @jkachmar I dont really care what tool you use. If you' re doing property tests, then just call it that. The generator is irrelevant in this regard then.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@ProgrammerDude @jkachmar I don't know what "property in your entrypoint" exactly means, but if you're able to test the outputs of a function against an arbitrary rule, then it's property based testing. Whatever you mechanism you use for the generator is just an implementation detail of property testing

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@ProgrammerDude @jkachmar fuzzing is a more limited, special case of property testing, because you're only looking for exceptions/panics/crashes.

In general in property testing you're actually checking some invariant, not just trying to produce crash. Testing involves more than just crash cecking.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@jessitron Cosmologist Dr. Brian Keating has been hosting some interesting livestreams with physics outsiders like Eric Weinstein and Stephen Wolfram - the latter two don't look fondly on the traditions at university for theoretical physics.

[Jon Schoning @JonSchoning]

@jkachmar looks like you've got some pothos cuttings there, gl