You can only drive two vehicles for the rest of your life. Both have to be from the same brand. What do you choose?

Both vehicles are totally free and all maintenance and repairs are free as well. No cheating/workarounds, they must be from the same brand, so being part of VAG or FCA doesn’t count. Only these two vehicles, forever. Which two would you choose?

submitted by Nevin Manimala Nevin Manimala /u/Errattik
[link] [comments]

The truth about Mid Night Club

So I guess you guys are familiar with Mid Night Club, a 90s club that do high speed racing. I’ve known about them for a long time and what I found is far from truth (at least whats written on the wiki article that I find was full of bollocks) So here is a point by point breakdown and rebuttal of the article.

  1. They were formed in 1987 (False) Based on the archived Mid Night Porsche Works site, they were founded in 1982. Around the era of Tomei racing. Link to translated version.
  2. They don’t exclusively race on the highways, they do other stuff too. A part of the club race on Hakone
  3. Impostor cars weren’t vandalized, if they really do vandalize cars they would immediately be identified because their cars have the names of tuner shops, so police investigation wouldn’t really be that hard. Here is a scan of an AutoWorks magazine in which the reviewer himself being a Mid Night Club member.
  4. I find it really hard to believe the club is private, they themselves were featured in a lot of video productions and numerous magazine features from Japan or overseas.
    1. Taiwanese car magazine SpecR doing a story on Mid Night Club and them being the backstory of Wangan Midnight
    2. Eternal Supercar Max Speed Trial produced by AutoWorks (Note the two drivers have Mid Night wording on their helmets)
    3. A number of Autoworks magazines. A magazine closely affiliated with Mid Night Club
  5. The wiki article mentions the club has a policy where they would disband if got into a crash and innocent bystanders were involved. Based on a Max Power interview with Masaru Hosoki, the interviewer explicitly mentions about a crash involving Mid Night Club the previous year. Part 1. Part 2.

TLDR: The Mid Night Club wiki article is completely misleading and poorly written.

submitted by Nevin Manimala Nevin Manimala /u/AprilexHK
[link] [comments]

Chem/math qn

Hello, Im a middle school student studying organic chemistry, and I just learnt about isomers. Is there a way to express the number of isomers of a compound as a function of the number of bonds/number of carbon/hydrogen atoms? This way, I don’t need to find out manually the number of possible isomers by drawing(which gets very tedious when the carbon atoms go above 10)

submitted by Nevin Manimala Nevin Manimala /u/RCRJ
[link] [comments]

Generate random points that lie inside an irregular polygon oriented in 3D

Hi, I would really appreciate it if any of you could shed light on how to generate random points that lie inside an irregular polygon that is oriented in 3D.

As I see it, there are two problems here: one, is to generate random points in a plane (given the normal vector) and two, being able to tell what points are inside the polygon and what are not.

This problem is not very difficult in 2D but I am not having any luck figuring it out in 3D.

submitted by Nevin Manimala Nevin Manimala /u/srivkrani
[link] [comments]

Derivation in Thomas Mitchell’s book. (x-post from r/MachineLearning)

In Mitchell’s Machine Learning textbook, the maximum likelihood hypothesis is defined to be argmax P(D/h) over all h in the hypothesis space, where D is the set of all observed target values d and P is the probability. When the target value is not assumed to be noise-free anymore, we define it to be d=f(x) +e, where e is a random continuous variable with an associated probability density function, and f(x) is the true target data value. This means that each target value d observed is now a continuous variable.

When generalizing the maximum likelihood hypothesis to this continuous variable, Mitchell replaces argmax P(D/h) by argmax f(D/h), where f is the probability density function. How is this valid? first of all, the probability density function is not the same as the probability. He then proceeds to say this new formula is the same as

argmax f(d1/h) * argmax f(d2/h)…*argmax f(dn/h) over all h in H

since the target values d1…dn are mutually independent. Each term would then be zero in this product, if he assumes the probability density function is the same as the probability since the probability of a particular data value occuring is zero.

submitted by Nevin Manimala Nevin Manimala /u/Andy_Reds
[link] [comments]