47uF

5 ms·

1.
by 47uF 13y ago
And Steve Wozniak isn't of much use without computers. I guess that makes him pretty useless as a programmer.
2.
by 47uF 13y ago
The worst thing to come out of the pycon event is that reasonable people like the OP are trying to "get" why this was a case of sexism. The answer is that it wasn't, and many posters, including women, have pointed out why. It's an issue of
3.
by 47uF 14y ago
So this article is addressed to the people that have the option of working from home but choose not to because they think it makes them less productive, and haven't factored their own happiness into that decision. Are there really that many
4.
by 47uF 14y ago
It's not hard to think of counter examples to this. Seeing a rival die isn't that funny. A child walking into a glass wall is pretty funny. The interesting question is how we can understand humor generally and fundamentally.
5.
by 47uF 14y ago
I'm not saying programmers are always right or rational. I'm saying they care more about truth and logical consistency. Or at least they care more about being the kind of person that cares about truth and logical consistency. Let's say ther
6.
by 47uF 14y ago
I don't think this example helps much, because it's not that we don't know what an unpleasant truth feels like. Everyone knows what that feels like. The difference is in what comes next. Do we accept a painful truth or accept a happy lie? T
7.
by 47uF 14y ago
"Hey there, coding is actually pretty hard, and while there are some really great perks to knowing it, you'll probably fail at getting there, and even if you don't fail, you might not end up at the place that has all of the awesome perks, j
8.
by 47uF 14y ago
Luckily some people's minds are quite resilient to becoming irreparably warped by logical thinking. :) I think you're overestimating how easy it is to fundamentally change the way someone thinks, as are the people who think anyone can get g
9.
by 47uF 14y ago
I don't think what you're saying is all that different from what the article is saying. It never says there's an actual conspiracy or that any specific person designed anything. But as you yourself said there seems to be a difference betwee
10.
by 47uF 14y ago
But I really think that I never learned those concepts in the first place. All I learned were rules to solve the problems given to me. For example I actually did remember the "chain rule". But those rules had no meaning to me, just moving n
11.
by 47uF 14y ago
Agreed. I had an interesting experience recently when I decided to "relearn" math. I had taken calculus courses in high school and university, and aced all the exams. But when I eventually came back to calculus out of personal interest, I r
12.
by 47uF 14y ago
Why is the idea of innate IQ still taken seriously if there's so little evidence for it? If intelligence is just the ability to think in a structured abstract way, doesn't it make sense to think of it as a skill developed over time? I mean
13.
by 47uF 14y ago
I think this is the most important point left out of the article. How hard it is to admit that you don't know something is dependent on the costs of doing so. Sometimes it's harder to pretend you do know. The better real world example isn't