🤓 Actually it’s *AKRB

All KKKop$$ R Ba$$tard$$

Here’s your eta: η

Yes, yes, yes, a thousand times yes! Imagine doing Fourier analysis without trig! (Complex exponentials are still trig, before anyone gets any ideas 😁)

I mean I’m an anarchist and I got to my position by reading 🤷

I love helping and working on things. What kind of things? I dunno. Tell me what you’re doing. Now we’re doing it.

Great attitude! You’re gonna have some great stories when you get older 😁.

Yes

We need those numbers way lower!

I agree with you (edit: the person I am responding to said that the impersonator is an asshole), I just want to make it clear that it’s not the OP of the thread being an asshole, because the troll is trying to make zir look bad.

Just so you know: the person you’re responding to is impersonating OP.

I keep wanting to write basically a whole dynamics and statics textbook but where the formulas are extended to non-Euclidean spaces.

Check out the book Mathematical Control Theory: Deterministic Finite-Dimensional Systems by Eduardo Sontag. A lot of his results take place in general metric spaces. Make sure to read the Appendix first, because this dude is absolutely next-level with the math. You’ll see.

You might also want to check out Infinite-Dimensional Systems Theory by Curtain and Zwart for an account of linear systems theory developed for separable Hilbert spaces. And for nonsmooth control, check out Nonsmooth Analysis And Control by Francis Clarke.

So you might need to blend a couple existing ideas together. Give it a shot!

Not much use for that kind of math whatsoever, but it’s fun

Immediately, I think it would have uses in quantum computing (where the state space can be an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space) and fluid dynamics (which are governed by partial differential equations, which can be represented as abstract differential equations on suitable function spaces).

What part of control theory are you focused on?

PM me for more details since I don’t wanna doxx myself, but my interest is in nonlinear high-dimensional dynamical systems.

Yup!

Yes exactly, in an anarchist society I wouldn’t stop doing control¹ theory, I would do even more control theory because I wouldn’t have to worry about publishing profitable results, because I’m autistic and for some reason, math makes me happy.

¹ Control of dynamical systems, e.g. steering the state of a differential equation, i.e. math, not authoritarian control 😁

One of my special interests is music production, specifically extreme metal. ~99% of the time, metal guitars are recorded in the studio with either a speaker cabinet loaded with a Celestion Vintage 30 guitar speaker¹, or an impulse response recorded by someone else who owns a cabinet loaded with Vintage 30s. And back when I picked this username on R*ddit, the fad was “PM_ME_{fetish}”, for example “PM_ME_FEET_PICS”. So I decided to subvert expectations by picking something not sexual 😆.

¹ Sometimes, speaker cabinets have different speaker brands within one cabinet to blend the sounds together. Because we typically place microphones right in front of the speaker, when cabinets have multiple different speakers, we usually mic one of each distinct speaker if we have the mics to do it. If I only had one mic, I’d mic up the Vintage 30, probably right up against the speaker cone (or mesh if the cabinet has one) adjusted to taste according to where I need it to sit in the mix 🤘😈🤘

It’s usually good to push people on this distinction IMO, but in this specific instance, the person whose post OP is reposting is literally a Palestinian living in a tent in Gaza begging for donations because all her possessions have been destroyed by . She probably knows it’s a genocide and understands the distinction (modulo translating to English) 🙃.

Yeah I know, but thank you for pointing that out. Like I’m under no pretense that Parenti is anything but an authoritarian Marxist, but I’d rather read an authoritarian Marxist (with the utmost skepticism for his biases and revisionism) than a self-described anarcho-syndicalist who’s in the Epstein Files.

I have terrible news for you about Prodhoun, Kropotkin, and Bakunin.

Yeah I’m aware 😞. Hence why we should read these texts critically and skeptically (every text in every field of endeavor forever, actually) with a historical understanding of the author’s flaws and biases. In my view, these thinkers actually made original contributions to anarchist thought, unlike Chomsky with the exception of Manufacturing Consent. Frankly, I actually do think that, unless you are doing historical research into how anarchists used to think, we really need to recommend and consult contemporary works as much as possible. I.e., anarchism absolutely has a problem with the ghosts of problematic white men infecting our thoughts.

Most anarchists I know aren’t obsessed with purity of character the same way hierarchical ideologies deify and airbrush their founders.

Neither am I…but Chomsky is absolutely beyond the pale. Like okay you don’t have to be perfect or even that good, but come on… Chomsky’s cooked.

it is possible for someone to roast and eat babies and still be able to say true and insightful things about politics. Moral failings do not make one politically impotent, and moral virtue is not a replacement for intellectual insight.

Yeah, some moral failings absolutely do, at least without some attempt at rehabilitation and fixing what was broken, for the simple reason that it demonstrates that the intellectual doesn’t seriously believe in what they are arguing against. Again, we can absolutely disagree on the parameters of what moral failings makes someone politically impotent, but they certainly exist, e.g. roasting and eating babies… and I’m certain based on my perusals of the Epstein Files that Chomsky has provided one of the best practical examples in recent memory!

It’s kind of comical to demand, “Okay, what else?” – some people only have one great idea in their life, and that’s enough.

I’m trying to say that other than Manufacturing Consent, we can basically toss his work without losing anything of value to anarchist philosophy. And to be a bit more precise: I’m not saying to literally forget Chomsky forever, but if there is anything he said that was said by someone else… probably better to go to that someone else instead.

And I’m only saying “what else” because I have not yet put in the work to find a replacement for Manufacturing Consent. People keep recommending Parenti’s Inventing Reality, but I have not had the time to read it and compare it with Manufacturing Consent, so I cannot and will not currently cite Inventing Reality. I am aware that Parenti hated anarchists, but I would rather read from someone who hates me than a man in the Epstein Files for his work laundering Epstein’s reputation.

In many ways, Noam Chomsky was the Carl Sagan of anarchism communication.

So we can toss him then? Because there’s a million Carl Sagans out there; Sagan was just the one lucky enough to get a platform.

He’s not perfect, but he was the bridge that supported many people’s transition from liberal to anarchist. Many people who you dismiss as ‘shitlibs’ are somewhere on that path.

Exactly, which is why we need to replace Chomsky with better anarchist <— liberal bridges, and make absolutely certain that the arrow consistently moves to the left and to not fail to pay attention next time the arrow points the other direction!

And that’s beside coming up with original ideas that fundamentally shaped the completely unrelated field of Linguistics.

Actually I had a conversation about this a couple months ago with another Lemmy user. I’m too lazy to find it now, but apparently, Chomsky’s main contribution to linguistics stifled the nascent field of artificial intelligence, from a computer science perspective. So I actually don’t even fuck with his linguistics work anymore 😆

We set a good example by holding Noam accountable for his words and deeds, but wishing him death and struggling to efface him from anarchism entirely despite his limited culpability for Epstein’s actions does not paint a picture of people driven by an ideology founded on fairness and justice.

So how exactly has Chomsky (or Valeria on his behalf) faced any justice for his complicity in the decades of abuse? Why did the Associated Press get a letter of apology before any of the victims? Like I’m not even talking punishments, like how have the Chomskys done any work to right the wrong they were (charitably) complicit in?

And even if abused no one, hell even if he was completely truly unaware of any abuse by Epstein himself, by Epstein’s class position, by Steve Bannon’s class position and fascist activism, Chomsky was, at best, a collaborationist with the capitalists. Which, by the way, is what Chomsky’s enemies on the Left have been screaming at Chomsky-supportive anarchists for decades and we plugged our ears and refused to fucking listen. Turns out, they were right!

Even if Chomsky did nothing illegal, the files revealed that he is still a capitalist collaborationist. And for that reason alone, we still can’t trust him even if he is completely exonerated of any possible complicity in Epstein’s sex crimes.

despite his limited culpability for Epstein’s actions

Big bro was literally laundering Epstein’s reputation AFTER he was convicted of sex crimes against minors. Limited my ass.

When I’m in a “deserving to die” competition and my opponent is this dude

DEATH IS TOO KIND A FATE FOR CHOMSKY AND ALL HIS EPSTEIN FILE CAPITALIST BUDDIES