<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Proof of the Kahn-Kalai Conjecture · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Proof of the Kahn-Kalai Conjecture — mentioned by xkcd1963</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36686810</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2203.17207:36686810</guid><pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2023 20:29:17 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; That&amp;#x27;s not a definition, it&amp;#x27;s a circular statement with no information. Common man do you want me to copy-paste the definition of science from wikipedia here? You can look it up yourself. My obvious statement is that the problem I see is that some stuff that people want to label as science is not science because it is not rigorous enough. &amp;gt; https://www.thoughtco.com/is-anthropology-a-science-3971060 You can read in the article that people do not agree on whether anthropology is science or not. &amp;gt; https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/sociology-is-so... Well here we run into a problem…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CO</category></item><item><title>A Proof of the Kahn-Kalai Conjecture — mentioned by dahart</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36674106</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2203.17207:36674106</guid><pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 22:52:21 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; I define science as anything that is scientifically rigorous That&amp;#x27;s not a definition, it&amp;#x27;s a circular statement with no information. Please provide a real and functional definition that can be used to identify whether a subject is scientifically rigorous or not. Your first link confirms that Anthropology is science. Your second link is false information content spam with no sources. People can and do experiment on society, the article we&amp;#x27;re commenting on is an example, the claim highlighted is obviously false. Your third link is outdated non-news - the AAA put the word science back in their…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CO</category></item><item><title>A Proof of the Kahn-Kalai Conjecture — mentioned by elromulous</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31164026</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2203.17207:31164026</guid><pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2022 04:50:14 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Direct link to the PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.17207&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CO</category></item><item><title>A Proof of the Kahn-Kalai Conjecture — mentioned by plaguepilled</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31163388</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2203.17207:31163388</guid><pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2022 02:37:47 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Here&amp;#x27;s a direct link to the preprint if you want to skip the fluff: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.17207&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2203.17207/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CO</category></item></channel></rss>
