lliwta

5 ms·

1.
by lliwta 12y ago
What general techniques are you using? Perhaps another way to put it: which Wikipedia article is most related to your methodology?
2.
by lliwta 12y ago
This is the most clever comment I've read on HN this week.
3.
by lliwta 12y ago
It's just like having to systemically lie about or not mention any other part of your life. We all do this about a variety of things every day. > Do strangers come up to people and ask about their religion, and is the problem that y
4.
by lliwta 12y ago
Do you have a point, or are you just being pedantic? That is, is there some essence of your position which I haven't adequately addressed? If so, what is that essence? FWIW Your original statement is referentially transparent wrt the
5.
by lliwta 12y ago
> Where did I say that the focus should purely be on programming? If you'd be okay with teaching a CS course without programming, we might be talking past one another. > I do not understand, and there are four statements, not two
6.
by lliwta 12y ago
Both of the statements in that link are just tautologies... You can teach computer science without teaching coding. And you can write algorithms without testing them on a computer. So the tautology that "you can't code if you can&
7.
by lliwta 12y ago
> These are extremely superficial reasons to criticize git They are use cases which matter to the author. That's basically the opposite of superficial. > If you want a single folder within a repo, why isn't that folder its o
8.
by lliwta 12y ago
No one is denying the notion that coding can be helpful when writing algorithms. But it doesn't follow that programming a machine is necessary for writing algorithms. The machine can be and often is as much of a distraction as it is
9.
by lliwta 12y ago
> Why is that surprising? The problem isn't that everyone doesn't learn it, but that noone learns it. It wouldn't be a big deal if the elective were available but not taken by everyone. The problem is that in most case
10.
by lliwta 12y ago
> Harold Abelson, yeah? I was wondering what an assembly programmer would say to this. Taking my comment within the wider context of the conversation, and the general conflation of "writing an algorithm" with "copying down
11.
by lliwta 12y ago
My point was that "copy an algorithm into programming language X" isn't something which needs to be taught in the first place, and isn't an economically valuable skill because literally anybody can be taught this skill i
12.
by lliwta 12y ago
> But without the notion of "programming," you're missing an entire style and class of algorithms. And if you focus on programming, you miss the forest for the trees. You can teach CS without teaching programming, and it w
13.
by lliwta 12y ago
Not the algorithm, the data. Anonymized user ids and their votes, together with relevant meta-data. I suppose the fact that there's already a detection algorithm biases the data, but it'd still be better than nothing.
14.
by lliwta 12y ago
> It's easy to find people who could create an algorithm but can only target a specific architecture, human grey matter. "Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute." The k
15.
by lliwta 12y ago
> Computers was an available subject in the nationwide standardised exams This would certainly help.
16.
by lliwta 12y ago
> If you cannot code, you cannot check that your ideas work out on a computer. Believe it or not, it's possible to write provable correct algorithms without writing a single test case :-) Of course implementing is a useful sanity
17.
by lliwta 12y ago
> Well, a committee of scientists that know better than you think results will be worthwhile and disagree. The article stressed that green lighting the research was a hugely controversial decision. I'm also pretty certain there are
18.
by lliwta 12y ago
>> In the general case, it's really easy to detect > Why do you say that? I've worked hard on this problem and would not call it easy. Are there reference data sets for this problem? If not, you or reddit should publish d
19.
by lliwta 12y ago
> I might be completely wrong in generalizing but haven't the schools in US picked up on this trend? There are lots of reasons, but I think the largest contributing factor is that these teaching staff doesn't exist. In most hi
20.
by lliwta 12y ago
> I fail to see how you could write an algorithm if you don't know how to code. Algorithms have existed for centuries. Computer programs have meaningfully existed for 100 years, if we're generous. And for a lot of that time, yo
21.
by lliwta 12y ago
Certain parts of software engineering research are moving in this direction, psychology as a the primary toolbox for research. Not sure how I feel about that. As far as science goes, Psychology isn't exactly the epitome of rigor. On th
22.
by lliwta 12y ago
> could be sumarised by saying many suburbs have taxes that are too low In some areas of Minnesota this could most certainly be the case.
23.
by lliwta 12y ago
> I think that making a consistent experience absolutely destroys the unique culture and history of places To be fair, the unique culture of the place used to be "industrial farming corn field" is most cases. It's not like
24.
by lliwta 12y ago
For me, this is the biggest difference. When I live in a city, I know my neighbors just because . Running into each other on the bus turns into a beer and a long chat. In Suburbia, you know a lot of your neighbors, but there's almost
25.
by lliwta 12y ago
> That I might find out one of my neighbours is a kidnapper? The far more likely scenario is that you find you have some common background, and waste an evening relating stories that you would probably never dredge up again otherwise. Th
26.
by lliwta 12y ago
I generally agree, except that the not being able to get around without a car bit is really True in my experience. edit: It's easy to know your neighbors in suburbia if you're outgoing, and things vary from street to street. But t
27.
by lliwta 12y ago
> and two car starts? That's a great way to have your dinner interrupted or end up waiting forever for your car.
28.
by lliwta 12y ago
> * Most 'traditional cities' couldn't be built for anywhere near the same cost as a modern development. Why is this? E.g. The author points out that narrow streets should be cheaper to build and maintain. I grew up in sub
29.
by lliwta 12y ago
It's possible you under-appreciate the amount of nuance in the underlying theory on fascism which the author is extending. Even though the author avoids mentioning who he's extending, anyone familiar with the literature on fascism
30.
by lliwta 12y ago
Thanks. That's hilarious. If I ever decide to kill a man, I guess I now know where :-)

More ›