Indeed, I find this story quite interesting (and disturbing) from the Belgian point of view.
Suppose the Belgian government declared the ambassador persona non grata, and sent them on the next plane to Washington. Presumably this would raise their popularity with their own voters, although if Trump noticed he'd throw another temper tantrum. What then?
Math professor here. If you want to learn math, then for the most part I recommend choosing time-tested avenues, using popular materials.
There are two reasons for this:
(1) Popular materials are usually popular for a reason: they reflect an approximate consensus, across a significant fraction of the mathematical community, that their approaches are more-or-less the best.
(2) If you learn the same way everyone else does, you'll have an easier time talking to others and finding materials on the internet.
I know some very innovative books which I highly recommend, for example Visual Group Theory by Nathan Carter:
But the innovation is pedagogical, in what Carter chooses to emphasize and how he presents everything. At the book's core, Carter agrees with everyone else about what the foundations of group theory are and should be.
Even Sheldon Axler's Linear Algebra Done Right (another excellent book), with its hilariously provocative title, only differs in its choice of emphasis and order of presentation. His choices are quite compatible with everyone else's.
I'll be trying to solve some problem, half-remember an email conversation from several years ago on something relevant, and want to look it up.
This feels like the most natural thing in the world to me, and it's not like the ability to save emails is new. Why, exactly, would a forced change of habits be for my own good?
Some drivers seem to resent the idea that they should have to share the road, or slow down for anyone. Even if cyclists do everything right, they're still slower than cars, and so will present at least a minor inconvenience for drivers.
In Canada the fight has gotten nasty, with governments in Alberta and Ontario putting forward legislation that could remove existing bike lanes.
When I go to research lectures, I sometimes hear that in response to audience questions, although not especially consistently. Some speakers do this more than others, I don't think anyone does it all the time.
These are very good questions, but it was a long time ago and I'm afraid I don't remember well enough to answer.
I'm not even sure I could have answered you at the time. In my memory, it was mostly students promoting the honor code. But I have to imagine that the university was quietly doing things to keep this going.
> I’m skeptical that there’s anything special about high trust communities other than a higher baseline of morale
Strictly speaking I'd agree with you -- but I would consider a higher baseline of morale to be itself quite special! Especially when it is shared amongst the entire community.
I went to Rice which had a similarly strong honor code, and it absolutely inspired pride. In me, and from what I could tell in many of my classmates.
Is it propaganda? In some sense, yes, the only way to maintain such a culture is to repeatedly insist on its importance to prospective and current students. But if so, then it is self-fulfilling propaganda, and in my opinion the honor code made my experience richer.
I live in South Carolina, about half an hour from Congaree National Park.
It's not a place you'd drive across the country to see, but it's beautiful and highly worth a visit. There are some freaky trees -- with knobs of roots that stick out from the ground, like nothing else I've seen. The place is kinda creepy, as if you're about to be attacked by zombies, and I love that.
There is a two mile elevated boardwalk which takes you around some of the most scenic areas of the park, and further hiking trails which branch off of that. There is also a river that goes through the park, and it's quite atmospheric in a canoe.
When I started my Ph.D. program, there was a weekly seminar that I started going to. At first, I instinctively left each week immediately after the talk was over. But I noticed that a lot of people would hang around afterwards and chat. Even though I found it a bit awkward, I started following their lead -- a habit I'm very glad I developed!
Personally, I've enjoyed classes in yoga and in group fitness.
This has several advantages: exercise is obviously good for you, and you can meet people while you're there. But more subtly, once you show up, someone is constantly telling you what to do. For me, this has meant much less of a drain on my mental energy and discipline than if I tried to work out on my own.
Academia, at least in math, has a tradition of being public. Conferences will advertise at least the list of speakers, and sometimes the full list of attendees. This is widely considered a good thing; people trying to decide whether to go to a conference will want to know who else will be there.
Moreover, the conference organizers have sent out multiple emails to the attendees warning that scammers were targeting them, and emphasizing that there were no third parties legitimately involved.
I certainly didn't take it as a slight against myself. Rather, I've met Tao and several other top mathematicians, and I don't imagine any of them would say they fit that description.
Indeed, Tao himself has written criticism of the "cult of genius":
I'm a research mathematician working in Tao's field. I'm not claiming to be as prolific as he is, not by a long shot -- but other mathematicians do understand, critique, develop, and engage with his work. Indeed, many of his papers are collaborative with a variety of other mathematicians.
Picture him as the star player on a basketball team. He may be the strongest player on the court, but he's still playing the same game as everyone around him.
If people are scared to share their thoughts, then that seems like the problem.
Also, how much of this communication is actually necessary? If someone doesn't care about an issue enough to write their own email, then why are they sending an email about it in the first place?
Suppose the Belgian government declared the ambassador persona non grata, and sent them on the next plane to Washington. Presumably this would raise their popularity with their own voters, although if Trump noticed he'd throw another temper tantrum. What then?