←back to thread

Accessible open textbooks in math-heavy disciplines

(richardzach.org)
235 points volemo | 2 comments | 29 Mar 25 16:38 UTC | HN request time: 0.405s | source
Show context
lutusp ◴[29 Mar 25 18:03 UTC] No.43517320[source]▶
At my age I find this issue annoyingly predictable -- it suggests replacing LaTeX with something more modern and/or flexible. But that was the original idea behind LaTeX -- to replace what preceded it, create a portable comunication medium for mathematical expressions.

Not to discourage experimentation, but I would like to see some behavoral reserve and healthy skepticism before adding another layer to the mathematical expression enterprise. There's also this issue to consider: https://xkcd.com/927/ .

replies(3): >>43518172 #>>43518575 #>>43521881 #
eviks ◴[29 Mar 25 20:45 UTC] No.43518575[source]▶
But you're discouraging experimentation with nothing else but a reference to a silly comic
replies(1): >>43521086 #
1. lutusp ◴[30 Mar 25 03:36 UTC] No.43521086[source]▶
The annoying comic would be silly if it weren't true. The point of the comic is the fact it alludes to, which by magnitude transcends any specific reference.
replies(1): >>43521173 #
2. eviks ◴[30 Mar 25 03:53 UTC] No.43521173[source]▶
Except it's not true, it ignores the most important factor - market share. If the new 15th standards becomes the most/only used one (as has happened with many new standards), then the silly idea from the comic "the future is no better with just +1 in the pile" doesn't reflect reality, reality would be that indeed that new universal standard solved the problem and reduced the ridiculous fragmentation.

That's why there is nothing healthy behind this thought-terminating comic cliche, just a generic conservative discouragement of any experiments.