Counting cohomology has done to me a numbers x_x

True nathematician would never make a mistake distinguishing finite and infinite cardinality. Countability, on the other hand… (but that’s a separate issue)

If only haskell devs were writing documentations, instead of going “type sigs is all the documentation you need!”

There is no good programming language, even including the ones people do not use.

I wish I were you, I struggle so much with reading books and papers

They do have antiderivatives, you just cannot elementarily compute them. Non-exact differential forms, however…

Seems like one can maybe work with complex metric. Interesting idea

I am sorry, but… to be pedantic, pythagorean theorem works on real-valued length. Complex numbers can be scalars, but one does not use it for length for some reason I forgor.

What is Harambe rep? I only know it is apparently “starting point of things going wrong”

Not really if he also have mild autism

At least you are not actually inferior to others. That’s for me, I am ultimately inferior for real.

Is this how my CS degree would also end up with?

I’m sure Krafton will mess it up.

I thought this was taught in high school. Curriculums differ drastically between countries, don’t they?

So I missed out on US nuclear stock? Damn

I mean the combinatorics and the imagery is nice.

I leave out my soup in room temp for days, while regularly boiling it every meal time to prevent it from spoiling. Am I screwed?

I wish I can talk endlessly like that. Sometimes it feels as if I am nonverbal…

Topology on steroids with K-valued logic, nice

I’d say still risky. They might perpetuate the bubble for longer, which means high risk of forced covering at loss.