> (yes, the authors named it after themselves)
The same way the AVL tree is named after its inventors - Georgy Adelson-Velsky and Evgenii Landis... Nothing peculiar about this imh
This might not be something entirely obvious to people outside of academia, but the vast majority (which I'm only weakening a claim of "totality" in order to guard against unknown instances) of entities that bear the name of humans in the sciences do so because other people decided to call them by that name.
From another view, Adelson-Velsky and Landis called their tree algorithm "an algorithm for the organization of information" (or, rather, they did so in Russian --- that's the English translation). RSA was called "a method" by Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman. Methods/algorithms/numbers/theorems/etc. generally are not given overly specific names in research papers, in part for practical reasons: researchers will develop many algorithms or theorems, but a very small proportion of these are actually relevant or interesting. Naming all of them would be a waste of time, so the names tend to be attached well after publication.
To name something after oneself requires a degree of hubris that is looked down upon in the general academic community; the reason for this is that there is at least a facade (if not an actual belief) that one's involvement in the sciences should be for the pursuit of truth, not for the pursuit of fame. Naming something after yourself is, intrinsically, an action taken in the seeking of fame.
Same with RSA and other things, I think the author's point is that slapping your name on an algorithm is a pretty big move (since practically, you can only do it a few times max in your life before it would get too confusing), and so it's a gaudy thing to do, especially for something illegitimate.
But also note that naming an algorithm, in and of itself, is fine; it's naming it after yoursel(f,ves) in the initial paper that's a sign of crackpottery.
* Named by: Probably fine but heavily weighted on the grandiosity of the title.
* Named after: Almost certainly fine (unless it's something like "X's Absolute Drivel Faced Garbage That Never Works Because X Kidnapped My Dog And Is A Moral Degenerate Algorithm", obvs.)
* Named by yoursel(f,ves) after yoursel(f,ves): In the initial paper? Heavy likelihood of crackpottery. Years later? Egotistical but strong likelihood of being a useful algorithm.
Long-time HN lurker here! Was excited to see this discussion around my major interests of Talmud, Kabbalah, and tech.
There are a lot of misconceptions and mystique surrounding the Talmud. I'd like to take the opportunity to clarify some fundamental aspects, as relates to the discussion here:
The famous "Talmud page" (discussed in the links in the parent comment) was set by a Christian printer in the 16th century.
It emulated a common layout in medieval Christian manuscripts for Christian primary texts and commentaries [0].
The analogy of the Talmud to a hypertext isn't especially apt, IMO. The Talmud indeed extensively cites Bible and Mishnah, and uses lots of technical terms. In this regard, a better analogy is to legal literature (which is what the Talmud in fact is). While being couched as a (fictional) "conversation"/dialogue between rabbis who lived over the course of ~400 years (100 CE to 500 CE).
In fact, Kabbalah (as another commenter mentioned) is a better example of a “hypertext,” since it’s full of recurring symbols that point to different Sefirot and other core concepts.
(By way of credentials: I hold an MA in academic Talmud and Kabbalah, write on these subjects in several venues, and have presented at academic workshops. Over the past two years, I’ve also been developing digital-humanities projects related to this work.)
That's awesome!! Thank you very much! I would have next asked you, what do you think of those apps for studying the Talmud, https://www.sefaria.org/app et al, but in those links you already mention it. Looking forward to reading these, thanks!
Sefaria is incredible, it's revolutionized access to classical texts. And their API gives full and complete access. My vibe-coded Talmud reader website fetches Talmud, Bible, and translations from Sefaria, you might be interested in checking it out :)
> The analogy of the Talmud to a hypertext isn't especially apt, IMO.
Isn’t it? Every page of the Talmud includes marginal notes (Masoret HaShas, Ein Mishpat, Torah Or) giving cross-references to relevant parts of the Torah, Talmud and other legal codes. In a web-based version I think it would be natural to represent those with hypertext.
>"Isn’t it? Every page of the Talmud includes marginal notes (Masoret HaShas, Ein Mishpat, Torah Or) giving cross-references to relevant parts of the Torah, Talmud and other legal codes. In a web-based version I think it would be natural to represent those with hypertext."
But my point is that those marginal notes are an artifact of the 16th century print edition. It's not anything inherent in the Talmud text.
The famous 16th-century Mikraot Gedolot edition of the Bible also features extensive marginal notes (the Mesorah) which function much like a dense network of cross-references.
In fact, the Mesorah is a medieval work (drawing on ancient sources) and is arguably was one of the most elaborate systems of cross-referencing found anywhere, at the time it was promulgated.
This differs from the Talmud’s cross-referencing, which doesn't predate the printed edition (as I note in the Seforim Blog article; the page citations are reliant on the universal page numbers that started from the first print edition).
> But my point is that those marginal notes are an artifact of the 16th century print edition. It's not anything inherent in the Talmud text.
OK, fair enough, if ‘the Talmud text’ is taken to be only the Mishna and the Gemara. (Though when I think of the Talmud it’s the printed edition that comes to mind, with all its accompanying commentary.)
Oh, just let two instances chat with each other and either let me read the conversation logs or have them present me what they learned/came up with since I've last checked on them. And that would be the end of all it all.
Author is very kind! In practice, many times I saw only the CR/CRU of CRUD getting implemented.
For example: as a company aspires to launch its product, one of the first features implemented in any system is to add a new user. But when the day comes when a customer leaves, suddenly you discover no one implemented off-boarding and cleanup of any sort.
They are designing it to sell. Their potential buyers are sociopaths just like them. These buyers, in turn, will also not benefit from the software, but I do imagine it would sell nicely. SNAFU.
reply