tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (We're mentioned in the New York Times) Sun, 04 Nov 2018 23:20:05 -0800 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.9 & Feed Publisher Andrea comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5375) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5375#Comment_5375 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5375#Comment_5375 Wed, 05 May 2010 17:00:49 -0700 Andrea @Qiaochu: yes, that's why I feel StackOverflow as nerdier than this place. Many people program computers for fun (including me), and that's well... nerdy. Even more so if they hang on StackOverflow. MathOverflow, in contrast, is geared towards professional mathematicians, not amateurs. Well, not that I care much, but just to explain my point.

]]> Scott Morrison comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5372) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5372#Comment_5372 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5372#Comment_5372 Wed, 05 May 2010 14:10:56 -0700 Scott Morrison Andrew Stacey comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5371) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5371#Comment_5371 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5371#Comment_5371 Wed, 05 May 2010 13:19:37 -0700 Andrew Stacey (Feature requests?)

]]> Qiaochu Yuan comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5368) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5368#Comment_5368 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5368#Comment_5368 Wed, 05 May 2010 11:08:14 -0700 Qiaochu Yuan StackOverflow answers technical questions that are relevant to anyone who uses computers, which is a lot of people. (By contrast, even if we are in principle willing to answer mathematical questions that come up in non-mathematical disciplines, we don't do so very often.)

]]> Andrea comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5367) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5367#Comment_5367 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5367#Comment_5367 Wed, 05 May 2010 10:56:03 -0700 Andrea Well, for instance StackOverflow sounds nerdier to me. Or Superuser.com.

]]> Qiaochu Yuan comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5366) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5366#Comment_5366 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5366#Comment_5366 Wed, 05 May 2010 10:13:24 -0700 Qiaochu Yuan I think that's sort of a reasonable label for us among SE sites. But at least we're also "really good," right?

]]> Andrea comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5365) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5365#Comment_5365 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5365#Comment_5365 Wed, 05 May 2010 10:02:42 -0700 Andrea Yes, but... well, we're mentioned as super-nerdy! :-(

]]> Scott Morrison comments on "We're mentioned in the New York Times" (5363) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5363#Comment_5363 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/384/were-mentioned-in-the-new-york-times/?Focus=5363#Comment_5363 Wed, 05 May 2010 08:56:53 -0700 Scott Morrison