Readit NewsPrecalculus by Axler
Calculus (Ninth Edition) by Thomas
Linear Algebra by Lay
How To Prove It by Velleman
Understanding Analysis by Abbott <--- I'm currently here
Much, much, much cheaper than paying $50/month. What I've spent most on so far has been printer paper and fountain pen ink because I do exercises by hand instead of using a tablet/iPad but in total this expense has been waaaaay under $50.
The author doesn't seem to share my difficulties either. His are of motivation and those seem to maybe be addressed by the resource he used and specifically sharing his progress with other users. For $50 I expect more than polished KhanAcademy, promises like "accelerates the learning process at 4X the speed of a traditional math class" (if anything I want to slow down), and a progress tracker to post pictures of on X. If I wanted to be told I'm amazing, how long my streak is, and to learn nothing I'd use duolingo.
>People hate small talk because it avoids this
I don't believe that. You can connect with someone before you've exchanged names, and you can fail to connect with someone you've shared your life's story with. This is the same mistake autists at my dance school make (including myself). They believe connection demands a rational exchange of valuable information. In dance that would be the technical complexity of whatever you're leading and the grace and mastery you lead it with. In language it would be sharing hopes and fears.
Small talk robs you of all that. It's a true measure of someone's ability to connect.
Honestly I think sometimes building (compassionate, 21st century) mental health "asylums" and treatment centres would do more to end homelessness.
AI could trounce experts as a conversational partner and/or educator in every imaginable field and we'd still be trying to proclaim humanity's superiority because technically the silicon can't 'think' and therefore it can't be 'intelligent' or 'smart'. Checkmate, machines!
I don't buy into this at all:
>Assuming AI will have an effect similar to 20th Century farm equipment’s on agriculture, why will that labor force behave differently to their 20th Century counterparts (and either refuse to or be prevented from finding new jobs)?
Because "farm equipment" can't also perform the jobs it creates. I'm assuming if/once AI can do most current jobs, it can also do most if not all the jobs it creates.
Anticheat is only hard because people are looking for a technical solution to a social problem. The actual way to get a good game in most things is to only play with people you trust and, if you think someone is cheating, stop trusting them and stop playing with them.
This doesn't scale to massive matchmaking scenarios of course - and so many modern games don't even offer it as an option - so companies would have to give up the automatic ranking of all players and the promise of dopamine that can be weaponised against them, but it works for sports in the real world and it worked for the likes of Quake, UT, etc. so I don't think it's a necessarily bad idea. Social ostracism is an incredibly powerful force.
However, it does mean that the big publishers wouldn't have control over everything a player does. Getting them to agree to that is probably the real hard problem.