Tell me more about Bun

Bun is a mod­ern JavaScript run­time like Node or Deno. It was built from scratch to fo­cus on three main things:

Start fast (it has the edge in mind).New lev­els of per­for­mance (extending JavaScriptCore, the en­gine).

Bun is de­signed as a drop-in re­place­ment for your cur­rent JavaScript & TypeScript apps or scripts — on your lo­cal com­puter, server or on the edge. Bun na­tively im­ple­ments hun­dreds of Node.js and Web APIs, in­clud­ing ~90% of Node-API func­tions (native mod­ules), fs, path, Buffer and more.

The goal of Bun is to run most of the worlds JavaScript out­side of browsers, bring­ing per­for­mance and com­plex­ity en­hance­ments to your fu­ture in­fra­struc­ture, as well as de­vel­oper pro­duc­tiv­ity through bet­ter, sim­pler tool­ing.

Web APIs like fetch, WebSocket, and ReadableStream are builtin bun im­ple­ments Node.js’ mod­ule res­o­lu­tion al­go­rithm, so you can use npm pack­ages in bun.js. ESM and CommonJS are sup­ported, but Bun in­ter­nally uses ESM. In bun.js, every file is tran­spiled. & just work. bun’s JSX & TypeScript tran­spiler is avail­able as an API in Bun.jsuse the fastest sys­tem calls avail­able with to write, copy, pipe, send and clone files.bun.js au­to­mat­i­cally loads en­vi­ron­ment vari­ables from files. No more re­quire(“dotenv”).load()Node-API bun.js im­ple­ments most ofN­ode-API (N-API). Many Node.js na­tive mod­ules just work. bun.js na­tively sup­ports a grow­ing list of Node.js core mod­ules along with glob­als like Buffer and process.

Bun.js uses the JavaScriptCore en­gine, which tends to start and per­form a lit­tle faster than more tra­di­tional choices like V8. Bun is writ­ten in , a low-level pro­gram­ming lan­guage with man­ual mem­ory man­age­ment.

Most of Bun is writ­ten from scratch in­clud­ing the JSX/TypeScript tran­spiler, npm client, bundler, SQLite client, HTTP client, WebSocket client and more.

An enour­mous amount of time spent pro­fil­ing, bench­mark­ing and op­ti­miz­ing things. The an­swer is dif­fer­ent for every part of Bun, but one gen­eral theme: ’s low-level con­trol over mem­ory and lack of hid­den con­trol flow makes it much sim­pler to write fast soft­ware. Sponsor the Zig Software Foundation

To in­stall bun, run this in­stall script in your ter­mi­nal. It down­loads Bun from GitHub.

Bun’s HTTP server is built on web stan­dards like Request and Response

Then open http://​lo­cal­host:3000 in your browser

See more ex­am­ples and check out the docs. If you have any ques­tions or want help, join Bun’s Discord

The same com­mand for run­ning JavaScript & TypeScript files with bun’s JavaScript run­time also runs pack­age.json “scripts”.

bun in­stall is an npm-com­pat­i­ble pack­age man­ager. You prob­a­bly will be sur­prised by how much faster copy­ing files can get.

What is the li­cense?

MIT License, ex­clud­ing de­pen­den­cies which have var­i­ous li­censes.

How do I see the source code?

The col­lab­o­ra­tion has ob­served a new kind of “pentaquark” and the first-ever pair of “tetraquarks”

The col­lab­o­ra­tion has ob­served a new kind of “pentaquark” and the first-ever pair of “tetraquarks”

The in­ter­na­tional LHCb col­lab­o­ra­tion at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has ob­served three never-be­fore-seen par­ti­cles: a new kind of “pentaquark” and the first-ever pair of “tetraquarks”, which in­cludes a new type of tetraquark. The find­ings, pre­sented to­day at a CERN seminar, add three new ex­otic mem­bers to the grow­ing list of new hadrons found at the LHC. They will help physi­cists bet­ter un­der­stand how quarks bind to­gether into these com­pos­ite par­ti­cles.

Quarks are el­e­men­tary par­ti­cles and come in six flavours: up, down, charm, strange, top and bot­tom. They usu­ally com­bine to­gether in groups of twos and threes to form hadrons such as the pro­tons and neu­trons that make up atomic nu­clei. More rarely, how­ever, they can also com­bine into four-quark and five-quark par­ti­cles, or “tetraquarks” and “pentaquarks”. These ex­otic hadrons were pre­dicted by the­o­rists at the same time as con­ven­tional hadrons, about six decades ago, but only rel­a­tively re­cently, in the past 20 years, have they been ob­served by LHCb and other ex­per­i­ments.

Most of the ex­otic hadrons dis­cov­ered in the past two decades are tetraquarks or pen­taquarks con­tain­ing a charm quark and a charm an­ti­quark, with the re­main­ing two or three quarks be­ing an up, down or strange quark or their an­ti­quarks. But in the past two years, LHCb has dis­cov­ered dif­fer­ent kinds of ex­otic hadrons. Two years ago, the col­lab­o­ra­tion dis­cov­ered a tetraquark made up of two charm quarks and two charm an­ti­quarks, and two “open-charm” tetraquarks con­sist­ing of a charm an­ti­quark, an up quark, a down quark and a strange an­ti­quark. And last year it found the first-ever in­stance of a “double open-charm” tetraquark with two charm quarks and an up and a down an­ti­quark. Open charm means that the par­ti­cle con­tains a charm quark with­out an equiv­a­lent an­ti­quark.

The dis­cov­er­ies an­nounced to­day by the LHCb col­lab­o­ra­tion in­clude new kinds of ex­otic hadrons. The first kind, ob­served in an analy­sis of “decays” of neg­a­tively charged B mesons, is a pen­taquark made up of a charm quark and a charm an­ti­quark and an up, a down and a strange quark. It is the first pen­taquark found to con­tain a strange quark. The find­ing has a whop­ping sta­tis­ti­cal sig­nif­i­cance of 15 stan­dard de­vi­a­tions, far be­yond the 5 stan­dard de­vi­a­tions that are re­quired to claim the ob­ser­va­tion of a par­ti­cle in par­ti­cle physics.

The sec­ond kind is a dou­bly elec­tri­cally charged tetraquark. It is an open-charm tetraquark com­posed of a charm quark, a strange an­ti­quark, and an up quark and a down an­ti­quark, and it was spot­ted to­gether with its neu­tral coun­ter­part in a joint analy­sis of de­cays of pos­i­tively charged and neu­tral B mesons. The new tetraquarks, ob­served with a sta­tis­ti­cal sig­nif­i­cance of 6.5 (doubly charged par­ti­cle) and 8 (neutral par­ti­cle) stan­dard de­vi­a­tions, rep­re­sent the first time a pair of tetraquarks has been ob­served.

“The more analy­ses we per­form, the more kinds of ex­otic hadrons we find,” says LHCb physics co­or­di­na­tor Niels Tuning. “We’re wit­ness­ing a pe­riod of dis­cov­ery sim­i­lar to the 1950s, when a ‘particle zoo’ of hadrons started be­ing dis­cov­ered and ul­ti­mately led to the quark model of con­ven­tional hadrons in the 1960s. We’re cre­at­ing ‘particle zoo 2.0’.”

“Finding new kinds of tetraquarks and pen­taquarks and mea­sur­ing their prop­er­ties will help the­o­rists de­velop a uni­fied model of ex­otic hadrons, the ex­act na­ture of which is largely un­known,” says LHCb spokesper­son Chris Parkes. “It will also help to bet­ter un­der­stand con­ven­tional hadrons.”

While some the­o­ret­i­cal mod­els de­scribe ex­otic hadrons as sin­gle units of tightly bound quarks, other mod­els en­vis­age them as pairs of stan­dard hadrons loosely bound in a mol­e­cule-like struc­ture. Only time and more stud­ies of ex­otic hadrons will tell if these par­ti­cles are one, the other or both.

Read more on the LHCb web­site.

European Union law­mak­ers have ap­proved land­mark leg­is­la­tion to heav­ily reg­u­late Apple, Google, Meta, and other big tech firms.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA) were pro­posed by the European Commission in December 2020. Now, col­lected in a “Digital Services Package,” the leg­is­la­tion has been for­mally adopted by the European Parliament and seeks to ad­dress “gatekeeper” big tech com­pa­nies.

Apple is al­most cer­tain to be clas­si­fied as a “gatekeeper” due to the size of its an­nual turnover in the EU, its own­er­ship and op­er­a­tion of plat­forms with a large num­ber of ac­tive users, and its “entrenched and durable po­si­tion” due to how long it has met these cri­te­ria, and will there­fore be sub­ject to the rules set out in the DMA. Under the DMA, gate­keep­ers will have to:

* Allow users to in­stall apps from third-party app stores and side­load di­rectly from the in­ter­net.

* Allow de­vel­op­ers to of­fer third-party pay­ment sys­tems in apps and pro­mote of­fers out­side the gate­keep­er’s plat­forms.

* Allow de­vel­op­ers to in­te­grate their apps and dig­i­tal ser­vices di­rectly with those be­long­ing to a gate­keeper. This in­cludes mak­ing mes­sag­ing, voice-call­ing, and video-call­ing ser­vices in­ter­op­er­a­ble with third-party ser­vices upon re­quest.

* Give de­vel­op­ers ac­cess to any hard­ware fea­ture, such as “near-field com­mu­ni­ca­tion tech­nol­ogy, se­cure el­e­ments and proces­sors, au­then­ti­ca­tion mech­a­nisms, and the soft­ware used to con­trol those tech­nolo­gies.”

* Ensure that all apps are unin­stal­lable and give users the abil­ity to un­sub­scribe from core plat­form ser­vices un­der sim­i­lar con­di­tions to sub­scrip­tion.

* Give users the op­tion to change the de­fault voice as­sis­tant to a third-party op­tion.

* Share data and met­rics with de­vel­op­ers and com­peti­tors, in­clud­ing mar­ket­ing and ad­ver­tis­ing per­for­mance data.

* Set up an in­de­pen­dent “compliance func­tion” group to mon­i­tor its com­pli­ance with EU leg­is­la­tion with an in­de­pen­dent se­nior man­ager and suf­fi­cient au­thor­ity, re­sources, and ac­cess to man­age­ment.

* Inform the European Commission of their merg­ers and ac­qui­si­tions.

The DMA also seeks to en­sure that gate­keep­ers can no longer:

* Pre-install cer­tain soft­ware ap­pli­ca­tions and re­quire users to use any im­por­tant de­fault soft­ware ser­vices such as web browsers.

* Require app de­vel­op­ers to use cer­tain ser­vices or frame­works, in­clud­ing browser en­gines, pay­ment sys­tems, and iden­tity providers, to be listed in app stores.

* Give their own their own prod­ucts, apps, or ser­vices pref­er­en­tial treat­ment or rank them higher than those of oth­ers.

* Reuse pri­vate data col­lected dur­ing a ser­vice for the pur­poses of an­other ser­vice.

The Digital Services Act (DSA), which re­quires plat­forms to do more to po­lice the in­ter­net for il­le­gal con­tent, has also been ap­proved by the European Parliament.

The DMA says that gate­keep­ers who ig­nore the rules will face fines of up to 10 per­cent of the com­pa­ny’s to­tal world­wide an­nual turnover, or 20 per­cent in the event of re­peated in­fringe­ments, as well as pe­ri­odic penal­ties of up to 5 per­cent of the com­pa­ny’s to­tal world­wide an­nual turnover. Where gate­keep­ers per­pe­trate “systematic in­fringe­ments,” the European Commission will be able to im­pose ad­di­tional sanc­tions, such as oblig­ing a gate­keeper to sell a busi­ness or parts of it, in­clud­ing units, as­sets, in­tel­lec­tual prop­erty rights, or brands, or ban­ning a gate­keeper from ac­quir­ing any com­pany that pro­vides ser­vices in the dig­i­tal sec­tor.

So far, Apple has heav­ily re­sisted at­tempts by gov­ern­ments to en­force changes to its op­er­at­ing sys­tems and ser­vices. For ex­am­ple, Apple sim­ply chose to pay a $5.5 mil­lion fine every week for months in the Netherlands in­stead of obey or­ders from the Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) to al­low third-party pay­ment sys­tems in Dutch dat­ing apps.

EU an­titrust chief Margrethe Vestager has set up a DMA task­force, with about 80 of­fi­cials ex­pected to join, but some law­mak­ers have called for an even big­ger task­force to counter the power of big tech com­pa­nies. The Digital Services Package now sim­ply needs to be adopted by the European Council be­fore com­ing into force in the fall.

Beyond the European Union, Apple’s ecosys­tem is in­creas­ingly com­ing un­der in­tense scrutiny by gov­ern­ments around the world, in­clud­ing in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, and more, with a clear ap­petite from global reg­u­la­tors to ex­plore re­quire­ments around app side­load­ing and in­ter­op­er­abil­ity. Further co­op­er­a­tion is ex­pected be­tween gov­ern­ments around the world on the is­sue and ex­perts are an­tic­i­pat­ing a “brutal bat­tle” be­tween Apple and global reg­u­la­tors.

Note: Due to the po­lit­i­cal or so­cial na­ture of the dis­cus­sion re­gard­ing this topic, the dis­cus­sion thread is lo­cated in our Political News fo­rum. All fo­rum mem­bers and site vis­i­tors are wel­come to read and fol­low the thread, but post­ing is lim­ited to fo­rum mem­bers with at least 100 posts.

On iPhone and iPad this ex­pe­ri­ence only works in the Safari browser.

Apple does­n’t al­low other browsers to ac­cess the cam­era.

Access to your cam­era is nec­es­sary, but no per­sonal data is col­lected.

On iPhone and iPad this ex­pe­ri­ence only works in the Safari browser.

Apple does­n’t al­low other browsers to ac­cess the cam­era.

Access to your cam­era is nec­es­sary, but no per­sonal data is col­lected.

Wow, you de­ci­ced to read the terms and con­di­tions first. You rock!!

This is an art pro­ject by Tijmen Schep that shows how face de­tec­tion al­go­ritms are in­creas­ingly used to judge you. It was made as part of the European Union’s Sherpa re­search pro­gram.

No per­sonal data is sent to our server in any way. Nothing. Zilch. Nada. All the face de­tec­tion al­go­rithms will run on your own com­puter, in the browser.

In this ‘test’ your face is com­pared with that of all the other peo­ple who came be­fore you. At the end of the show you can, if you want to, share some anon­i­mized data. That will then be used to re-cal­cu­late the new av­er­age. That anony­mous data is not shared any fur­ther.

You can also read more about the sources and source code that this pro­ject is based on, or read the press re­lease.

A threat ac­tor has taken to a fo­rum for news and dis­cus­sion of data breaches with an of­fer to sell what they as­sert is a data­base con­tain­ing records of over a bil­lion Chinese civil­ians — al­legedly stolen from the Shanghai Police.

Over the week­end, re­ports started to sur­face of a post to a fo­rum at Breached.to. The post makes the fol­low­ing claim:

HackerDan of­fered to sell the lot for 10 Bitcoin — about $200,000. We’ve saved HackerDan’s post as a PDF in case it van­ishes.

HackerDan re­leased sam­ple datasets: one con­tain­ing de­liv­ery ad­dresses and of­ten in­struc­tions for dri­vers; an­other with po­lice records; and the last with per­sonal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion in­for­ma­tion like name, na­tional ID num­ber ad­dress, height, and gen­der.

China has a na­tional po­lice force, and that pre­sum­ably has a Shanghai of­fice. But an en­tity called the “Shanghai National Police” is hard to find.

Media out­lets were nonethe­less able to ver­ify that the con­tents of the sam­ple - what­ever the source - de­scribe ac­tual peo­ple.

Gigantic civil­ian data leak if con­firmed: A hacker is sell­ing an al­leged Shanghai po­lice data leak con­tain­ing 1 bil­lion Chinese na­tion­als’ names, home ad­dresses, ID #, phone #, crim­i­nal records, etc. Hacker says it’s from an Aliyun (Alibaba) pri­vate cloud server. pic.twit­ter.com/​IRPG35SWYI

— Zeyi Yang (@ZeyiYang) July 3, 2022

“Five peo­ple con­firmed all of the data, in­clud­ing case de­tails that would be dif­fi­cult to ob­tain from any source other than the po­lice. Four more peo­ple con­firmed ba­sic in­for­ma­tion such as their names be­fore hang­ing up,” re­ported the Wall Street Journal.

The WSJ’s re­porter Karen Hao de­scribed the ex­pe­ri­ence on Twitter:

I was truly stunned when the first per­son picked up—I re­ally be­lieved the whole thing to be fake. By the third, I was shak­ing—both from the nerves of try­ing to ex­plain why I had their ex­tremely pri­vate in­for­ma­tion and the weight of re­al­iz­ing what this leak could mean for so many.

— Karen Hao 郝珂灵 (@_KarenHao) July 4, 2022

While the Shanghai gov­ern­ment and po­lice de­part­ment have largely been silent over the leak, so­cial me­dia plat­forms Weibo and WeChat were not — at least un­til Sunday af­ter­noon when users on Weibo be­gan ex­pe­ri­enc­ing data leak-re­lated blocked hash­tags.

On Monday, an un­usual voice joined in the analy­sis of the event: Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of cryp­tocur­rency ex­change Binance.

“CZ” — as he’s known — took to Twitter with the fol­low­ing:

Our threat in­tel­li­gence de­tected 1 bil­lion res­i­dent records for sell in the dark web, in­clud­ing name, ad­dress, na­tional id, mo­bile, po­lice and med­ical records from one asian coun­try. Likely due to a bug in an Elastic Search de­ploy­ment by a gov agency. This has im­pact on …

— CZ 🔶 Binance (@cz_binance) July 3, 2022

CZ’s post came four days af­ter HackerDan’s so, while some facts matched, it was un­clear if the CEO was re­fer­ring to a dif­fer­ent event.

He later tweeted again, this time al­leg­ing “this ex­ploit hap­pened be­cause the gov de­vel­oper wrote a tech blog on CSDN and ac­ci­den­tally in­cluded the cre­den­tials.”

Whatever the source of the leak, it will might­ily an­noy China. The na­tion’s gov­ern­ment has re­cently pri­or­i­tized per­sonal data pro­tec­tion and crit­i­cal in­fra­struc­ture se­cu­rity. If the People’s Police have mucked up on both counts, that will not go down well. ®

Huh dis­cov­ered that this kind of math­e­mat­ics could give him what po­etry could not: the abil­ity to search for beauty out­side him­self, to try to grasp some­thing ex­ter­nal, ob­jec­tive and true, in a way that opened him up more than writ­ing ever had. “You don’t think about your small self,” he said. “There’s no place for ego.” He found that un­like when he was a poet, he was never mo­ti­vated by the de­sire for recog­ni­tion. He just wanted to do math.

Hironaka, per­haps rec­og­niz­ing this, took him un­der his wing. After Huh grad­u­ated and started a mas­ter’s pro­gram at Seoul National University — where he also met Nayoung Kim, now his wife — he spent a lot of time with Hironaka. During breaks, he fol­lowed the pro­fes­sor back to Japan, stay­ing with him in Tokyo and Kyoto, car­ry­ing his bags, shar­ing meals, and of course con­tin­u­ing to dis­cuss math.

Huh ap­plied to about a dozen doc­toral pro­grams in the U. S. But be­cause of his undis­tin­guished un­der­grad­u­ate ex­pe­ri­ence, he was re­jected by all of them save one. In 2009, he be­gan his stud­ies at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, be­fore trans­fer­ring to the University of Michigan in 2011 to com­plete his doc­tor­ate.

Despite the chal­lenges — liv­ing in a new coun­try, spend­ing time apart from Kim (she stayed at Seoul National University for her doc­tor­ate in math­e­mat­ics) — Huh cher­ished his ex­pe­ri­ences in grad­u­ate school. He was able to ded­i­cate him­self wholly to math, and he rel­ished the free­dom of ex­plo­ration that had drawn him to the sub­ject in the first place.

He im­me­di­ately stood out. As a be­gin­ning grad­u­ate stu­dent in Illinois, he proved a con­jec­ture in graph the­ory that had been open for 40 years. In its sim­plest form, the prob­lem, known as Read’s con­jec­ture, con­cerned poly­no­mi­als — equa­tions like n4 + 5n3 + 6n2 + 3n + 1 — at­tached to graphs, which are col­lec­tions of ver­tices (points) con­nected by edges (lines). In par­tic­u­lar, let’s say you want to color the ver­tices of a graph so that no two ad­ja­cent ver­tices have the same color. Given a cer­tain num­ber of col­ors at your dis­posal, there are many ways to color the graph. It turns out that the to­tal num­ber of pos­si­bil­i­ties can be cal­cu­lated us­ing an equa­tion called the chro­matic poly­no­mial (which is writ­ten in terms of the num­ber of col­ors be­ing used).

Mathematicians ob­served that the co­ef­fi­cients of chro­matic poly­no­mi­als, no mat­ter the graph, al­ways seem to obey cer­tain pat­terns. First, they are uni­modal, mean­ing they in­crease and then de­crease. Take the pre­vi­ous ex­am­ple of a poly­no­mial. The ab­solute val­ues of its co­ef­fi­cients — 1, 5, 6, 3, 1 — form a uni­modal se­quence. Moreover, that se­quence is also “log con­cave.” For any three con­sec­u­tive num­bers in the se­quence, the square of the mid­dle num­ber is at least as large as the prod­uct of the terms on ei­ther side of it. (In the above poly­no­mial, for in­stance, 62 ≥ 5 × 3.)

Still, math­e­mati­cians strug­gled to prove these prop­er­ties. And then, seem­ingly out of nowhere, along came Huh.

As a mas­ter’s stu­dent, he had stud­ied al­ge­braic geom­e­try and sin­gu­lar­ity the­ory with Hironaka. The main ob­jects of study in that field are called al­ge­braic va­ri­eties, which can be thought of as shapes de­fined by cer­tain equa­tions. Intriguingly, as­so­ci­ated to cer­tain kinds of al­ge­braic va­ri­eties are num­bers that are known to be log con­cave — some­thing Huh only knew be­cause of the serendip­i­tous di­rec­tion his stud­ies had taken him in. Huh’s key idea was to find a way to con­struct an al­ge­braic va­ri­ety such that those as­so­ci­ated num­bers were pre­cisely the co­ef­fi­cients of the chro­matic poly­no­mial of the graph from the orig­i­nal ques­tion.

His so­lu­tion stunned the math com­mu­nity. It was at that point that the University of Michigan, hav­ing re­jected his ini­tial ap­pli­ca­tion, re­cruited him to their grad­u­ate pro­gram.

Huh’s achieve­ment was im­pres­sive not just be­cause he had solved Read’s con­jec­ture when it had seemed com­pletely in­tractable for so long. He had shown that some­thing much deeper — and geo­met­ric — was lurk­ing be­neath com­bi­na­to­r­ial prop­er­ties of graphs.

Mathematicians were also im­pressed by his de­meanor. His talks at con­fer­ences were al­ways ac­ces­si­ble and con­crete; in speak­ing with him, it was clear that he was think­ing both deeply and broadly about the con­cepts he was work­ing with. “He was ridicu­lously ma­ture for a grad­u­ate stu­dent,” said Matthew Baker, a math­e­mati­cian at the Georgia Institute of Technology. After Baker met him for the first time, “I was just like, who is this guy?”

According to Mircea Mustaţă, Huh’s ad­viser at the University of Michigan, he re­quired al­most no su­per­vi­sion or guid­ance. Unlike most grad­u­ate stu­dents, he al­ready had a pro­gram in mind, and ideas about how to pur­sue it. “He was more like a col­league,” Mustaţă said. “He al­ready had his own way of look­ing at things.”

Many of his col­lab­o­ra­tors note that he’s in­cred­i­bly hum­ble and down-to-earth. When he learned he’d won the Fields Medal, “it did­n’t re­ally feel that good,” Huh said. “Of course you are happy, but deep down, you’re a lit­tle bit wor­ried that they might even­tu­ally fig­ure out that you’re not ac­tu­ally that good. I am a rea­son­ably good math­e­mati­cian, but am I Fields Medal-worthy?”

Graphs are ac­tu­ally just one type of ob­ject that can de­fine more gen­eral struc­tures called ma­troids. Consider, for ex­am­ple, points on a two-di­men­sional plane. If more than two points lie on a line in this plane, you can say that those points are “dependent.” Matroids are ab­stract ob­jects that cap­ture no­tions like de­pen­dence and in­de­pen­dence in all sorts of dif­fer­ent con­texts — from graphs to vec­tor spaces to al­ge­braic fields.

Just as graphs have chro­matic poly­no­mi­als as­so­ci­ated with them, there are equa­tions called char­ac­ter­is­tic poly­no­mi­als at­tached to ma­troids. It was con­jec­tured that the poly­no­mi­als for these more gen­eral ob­jects should also have co­ef­fi­cients that are log con­cave. But the tech­niques Huh used to prove Read’s con­jec­ture only worked for show­ing log con­cav­ity for a very nar­row class of ma­troids, such as the ma­troids that arise from graphs.

With the math­e­mati­cian Eric Katz, Huh broad­ened the class of ma­troids such a proof could ap­ply to. They fol­lowed a recipe of sorts. As be­fore, the strat­egy was to start with the ob­ject of in­ter­est — here, a ma­troid — and use it to con­struct an al­ge­braic va­ri­ety. From there, they could ex­tract an ob­ject called a co­ho­mol­ogy ring and use some of its prop­er­ties to prove log con­cav­ity.

There was just one prob­lem. Most ma­troids don’t have any sort of geo­met­ric foun­da­tion, which means there’s not ac­tu­ally an al­ge­braic va­ri­ety to as­so­ci­ate to them. Instead, Huh, Katz and the math­e­mati­cian Karim Adiprasito fig­ured out a way to write down the right co­ho­mol­ogy ring straight from the ma­troid, es­sen­tially from scratch. They then showed, us­ing a new set of tech­niques, that it be­haved as if it had come from an ac­tual al­ge­braic va­ri­ety, even though it had­n’t. In do­ing so, they proved log con­cav­ity for all ma­troids, re­solv­ing the prob­lem known as Rota’s con­jec­ture once and for all. “It’s pretty re­mark­able that it works,” Baker said.

The work showed that “you don’t need space to do geom­e­try,” Huh said. “That made me re­ally fun­da­men­tally re­think what geom­e­try is.” It would also guide him to­ward a host of other prob­lems, where he con­tin­ued to push that idea fur­ther, al­low­ing him to de­velop an even broader range of meth­ods.

But for all the speci­ficity the work re­quires, build­ing the right co­ho­mol­ogy ring re­quires mas­sive amounts of guess­work and grop­ing around in the dark. It was an as­pect of the work that Huh par­tic­u­larly en­joyed. “There is no guid­ing prin­ci­ple … no clearly de­fined goal,” he said. “You just have to make a guess.”

Ä1 - All In One Advanced Search

To get the best re­sults, search on a spe­cific site us­ing ad­vanced fil­ters.

Sign up

A sta­t­i­cally-typed func­tional lan­guage with gener­ics, type­classes, sum types, pat­tern-match­ing, first-class func­tions, cur­ry­ing, al­ge­braic ef­fects, as­so­ci­ated types, good di­ag­nos­tics, etc.

This com­mit does not be­long to any branch on this repos­i­tory, and may be­long to a fork out­side of the repos­i­tory.

Permalink

Added sup­port for multi-ef­fect han­dlers (changes still re­quired!)

Added sup­port for multi-ef­fect han­dlers (changes still re­quired!)

Allow im­plied mem­bers to spec­ify a real mem­ber

Allow im­plied mem­bers to spec­ify a real mem­ber

Allow im­plied mem­bers to spec­ify a real mem­ber

A sta­t­i­cally-typed func­tional lan­guage with gener­ics, type­classes, sum types, pat­tern-match­ing, first-class func­tions, cur­ry­ing, al­ge­braic ef­fects, as­so­ci­ated types, good di­ag­nos­tics, etc.

You can’t per­form that ac­tion at this time.

You signed in with an­other tab or win­dow. Reload to re­fresh your ses­sion.

You signed out in an­other tab or win­dow. Reload to re­fresh your ses­sion.

Amazon has been work­ing on a Lord of the Rings TV show for years, and they seem de­ter­mined that it eclipse any­thing ever at­tempted on TV be­fore. The com­pany spent $250 mil­lion on the rights alone, and that’s be­fore an ac­tor was cast or a cam­era turned on. Now, Deadline confirms that the first sea­son of the show will cost $465 mil­lion to pro­duce.

For com­par­ison’s sake, Peter Jackson’s whole Lord of the Rings trilogy cost $281 mil­lion to make. For some­thing more re­cent, Game of Thrones was spend­ing around $100 mil­lion per sea­son af­ter it re­ally blew up — this would be around sea­son 6 — and spent far less in its early days.

The $465 mil­lion num­ber came out when New Zealand, where the show is shoot­ing, re­vealed that it would be re­bat­ing the pro­duc­tion around 25% of its costs, or $116 mil­lion. “There is con­sid­er­able eco­nomic and tourism po­ten­tial in the Lord of the Rings Project,” said Stuart Nash, the coun­try’s Economic and Regional Development Minister. “Not only does it bol­ster our global rep­u­ta­tion as a de­sir­able place to make screen pro­duc­tions, it will fur­ther strengthen our tourism ap­peal to vis­i­tors with the ‘Middle-earth’ theme. Under the [memorandum of un­der­stand­ing], the Government’s in­vest­ment will en­able sig­nif­i­cant eco­nomic, cul­tural and in­dus­try de­vel­op­ment ben­e­fits to New Zealand over many years.”

New Zealand al­ready gets tourism dol­lars thanks to Jackson’s LOTR and Hobbit movies, which were also filmed the coun­try. Clearly they want to keep the as­so­ci­a­tion go­ing.

There is no pre­miere date as of yet for Amazon’s new show. Film­ing is on­go­ing af­ter some set­backs due to the pan­demic. I’m go­ing to go ahead and guess we’re look­ing at a 2022 pre­miere.

As with Peter Jackson and his orig­i­nal tril­ogy, Amazon is shoot­ing the first two sea­sons back to back, and will be filled with elab­o­rate sets and ex­pen­sive cos­tumes. The se­ries is set dur­ing the Second Age of Middle-earth, thou­sands of years be­fore The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. As lit­tle as we know about it, the enor­mous has us ex­cited.

But not all is peachy keen in Lord of the Rings land. Amazon re­cently told Bloomberg that it had can­celled a planned mas­sively mul­ti­player on­line game to be set in Middle-earth, say­ing it was “unable to se­cure terms” to con­tinue de­vel­op­ment. Chinese com­pany Leyou was in charge of the pro­ject, and the can­cel­la­tion may have some­thing to do with a con­tract dis­pute that arose af­ter Leyou was bought by gi­ant multi-na­tional cor­po­ra­tion Tencent.

I guess the $500 mil­lion Lord of the Rings TV show will have to be enough.

To stay up to date on every­thing fan­tasy, sci­ence fic­tion, and WiC, fol­low our all-en­com­pass­ing Face­book page and sign up for our ex­clu­sive newslet­ter.

Get HBO, Starz, Showtime, and MORE for FREE with a no-risk, 7-day free trial of Amazon Channels