ccalf

7 ms·

1.
by ccalf 7y ago
I just found this week's blog posting by RJ Lipton: https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2019/10/21/a-polemical-overre... The Mackenzie book chapter discusses both the Fetzer and DeMillo Lipton Perlis controve
2.
by ccalf 7y ago
Actually, the SAT reading comprehension questions are not that simple and trip people up. Which is really my point of analogy. They're the kind of questions where you either got the right answer or not, but explaining it to the perso
3.
by ccalf 7y ago
There is none; the people who keep promulgating this falsehood about Stallman say that because of one paragraph that anyone who can pass the SAT reading comprehension tests, parse standard English, or understand the basics of logical reason
4.
by ccalf 7y ago
I find this approach strangely condescending. For example the author says: > Understanding the value attributed to X, Y, and Z in that particular text requires assessment of the rhetorical strategies of the author(s). They could've
5.
by ccalf 7y ago
> Too many of the people I meet are ground down, sliding by, holding on, grappling with their identity and place in the world, somewhere on the scale of mildly scarred to full blown post traumatic, anxiety ridden, and/or profoundly
6.
by ccalf 8y ago
I think it's clearer to understand the Church-Turing thesis as two theses, not one. Turing's thesis was that (intuitive) computability equals (formalizable) Turing computability. So you could completely ignore the recursive functi
7.
by ccalf 8y ago
OK but if by saving 1000 lives a year required as a side-effect that you personally be among the fatalities, would that be OK for you? I hope not. Think of this as a technical corner case; so, the question is the soundness of the analysis—f
8.
by ccalf 9y ago
It's plausible and goes to show why the blog post choosing salary is itself a bad metric to begin with. It has skewed the entire discussion.
9.
by ccalf 10y ago
Well the real issue is defining what's better. And the worry some of us have is this new trend of grappling with increased complexity seems short-sighted; we don't like the direction it's going. As much as Sussman shows under
10.
by ccalf 10y ago
SICP is programming for the theoretically inclined. It seems analogous to calculus in math versus calculus for physics: you can study it more formally with all the proper proofs and derivations (and bizarre cases), or pick up just the appli