Greeting from the University of Illinois. Been there, done that, fired the board, fired the president, fired the provost, fired the new president two years later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Illinois_clout_scandal

Yup. Unless Richard Bellman was a time lord, the dates just don’t match up. Bellman published “dynamic programming” algorithms months before “Engine Charlie” became Secretary of Defense. My theory is that it’s a riff on Charles Atlas’s “dynamic tension”.

Among the top 5% of all students you have ever rated or will ever rate, is this student in the top 1%, the top 0.1%, or the top 0.01%?

Well, you did contrast “cool math” with “tools they can *use*”, as if the former were not a subset of the latter.

All my learning objectives start with action verbs: Prove, design, analyze, build. “Understanding” is a seductive trap. And I think that trap is at the core of the false dichotomy between theory and practice.

I am deeply uncomfortable with the axiom that “theory” is the opposite of “practice”. Reasoning precisely is a practical skill. Design is a practical skill. Explaining complex ideas is a practical skill. Writing proofs is a practical skill—other people call it “programming”!

Yes, but with a lower priority than “utilize” instead of “use”, or “algorithm” for whatever AI does. I prefer “cycles” (or the corresponding imperial unit “googleweeks”).

Why not “combinator”? (Or even “combiner”?)

Optimist: The glass is half full
Pessimist: The glass is half empty
Geometer: volume(glass) = 2 volume(liquid)
Algorithmist: The glass is approximately full, but not approximately empty.
Topologist: The disk is wet.