Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 946 posts

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#931

Post by sanroot98 »

throwaway290 wrote: post #589
vidanay wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#3 really hits home when you realize we have rules for killing each other (war). And we have separate legal trials to determine if someone broke those rules while trying to kill someone else. The penalty for breaking the rules about killing someone often is to be killed.

Probably most rules that we have are there to prevent us (admittedly this applies mostly to men) from killing each other. That's why "rules are just constructs we humans created" rings stupid/horrifying. Obviously they were created by humans but that is also why they matter. I prefer "rules were written by humans, mostly in blood". It took years for OP to get the first part, here's to them getting the second part fas…

Honar killing

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#932

Post by carapace »

carapace wrote: post #910
icepat wrote: post #909

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you're willing to pick some actual scientific studies And I have. Meta-reviews are considered important, effective, and valuable ways of probing the state of the literature. Dismissing it out of hand because you dislike who prepared it is fallacious.

> Dismissing it out of hand because you dislike who prepared it is fallacious. Please, it's like you cited a paper called "Do Ghosts Exist?" prepared by a member of the There's No Such Thing as Ghosts club. You don't feel at least a little bit silly? - - - - Anyway, I'm reading the paper now. He starts out well, with a DB of 315 articles, but then discards all but 63 of them "based on the criterion of whether the jou…

I've looked over the "works non-supportive of the NLP tenets and the tenets-derived hypotheses" and, well, in the words of Inigo Montoya, "I do not think it means what you think it means."

Basically, in the mid-80's some researchers badly misunderstood a facet of NLP, researched it badly, and then declared the whole thing to be baloney. Here's a good (brief) paper describing some of the problems with the "research":

Einspruch, E. L., & Forman, B. D. (1985). Observations concerning research literature on Neurolinguistic Programming. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 589-596.

Since then, as far as I can tell, almost no one has done anything like proper science to NLP at all, at all. The NLP people are merrily doing their thing, the research psychologists are doing their thing, and "never the twain shall meet", eh?

It's a sad state of affairs really.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#933

Post by flippinburgers »

pstuart wrote: post #871
flippinburgers wrote: post #840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not vague. What is vague is the shadowy threat of being called a racist for stating ones opinion while having the wrong color of skin. It is a problem. Just a wee bit.

I'm sorry -- that wasn't intended as an insult, more of an issue on me being able to ascertain exactly what you were saying. Comprehending other people's writing can be challenging at times even if you think you know what they're saying. One's opinion should stand on the words/ideas behind them, not what one looks like. Getting called out for that is bullshit and should be disregarded. Part of my confusion is also th…

I fully agree with you about ideas standing on their merits. I hope we continue to move in that direction as a species.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#934

Post by icepat »

carapace wrote: post #928
icepat wrote: post #926

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if you're going to sarcastically dismiss valid points that discredit what you're talking about like this.

So if I'm not completely respectful and I don't admit defeat before even we begin you're unwilling to examine the scientific evidence?

Given the continued sarcasm, I'll take that as a no. I'll also point you over to these: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Edit out swipes.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#935

Post by carapace »

icepat wrote: post #934
carapace wrote: post #928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I'm not completely respectful and I don't admit defeat before even we begin you're unwilling to examine the scientific evidence?

Given the continued sarcasm, I'll take that as a no. I'll also point you over to these: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Edit out swipes.

I'm sorry. I had no idea Doge Meme would offend you so much. Please accept my apology.

- - - -

I've had a chance to look over the papers discussed in the meta-study you cited.

I think you should look them over too, you might want to "adjust your priors" as they say in Bayesian modelling. The evidence really doesn't support your position.

Like I said above, Skeptics perform an important and valuable function in the intellectual life of man. James Randi has done a lot of good and important work, for example. However, in this case, it's clear to me that the Skeptics have erroneously identified NLP et. al. as "woo-woo". It's truly unfortunate.

In any event, thank you for prompting me to actually go look at the papers. It was kind of a waste of time (for me at least) but at least now I know (to my own satisfaction) what went wrong in the scientific study of NLP. One day we'll do proper science to it. I look forward to that day.

- - - -

"See ya space cowboy."

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#936

Post by 493579620678 »

DrewADesign wrote: post #768
493579620678 wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think talking more about race works any better or should be considered to be "social progress" rather than the opposite? Would that study have better results if done today? I'm not American, but I don't see why you are so sure today's America is not closer to the Jim Crow Era than 2005 was. I'm a black person who grew up in Sweden in the 00s and early 10s, and I'm very glad race was never relevant or t…

You should read about the experiences of African Americans. Many cultural facets and political tensions held over from slavery are alive and well. Financially, income inequality in Sweden is vastly lower than in the United States as it is, and in the United States much of the inequality falls on racial boundaries. A recent Federal Reserve Bank of Boston study found that local white household’s median net worth was $2…

I'm not objecting to talking about racism. I'm objecting to seeing race as a significant part of what makes a person. It's possible to do one without the other.

I don't see how it's useful to note that something didn't work when there is no evidence to suggest that the alternative works any better. I don't understand how talking more about race as a characteristic could possibly help to reduce racism or racial inequality. It seems to me much more likely to do the opposite.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#937

Post by BuckRogers »

gadders wrote: post #877
Viliam1234 wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is silly to feel responsible for bad things that other people did, just because they happened to have the same color of skin, it is also silly to take credit for the good things other people did.

Well strictly speaking a) they don't say they're proud of it, they say the "refuse to apologise for it" and b) they have ethnic minority members and their leader was afro-cuban (Enrique Tarrio).

This is true. I am not a Proud Boy expert. I don't support the movement. I just know of them and referenced a line of theirs. But their stance is better nuanced than my recollection was.

I do like the minority inclusion because you don't have to be white to be Christian, support a modern law-abiding civilization, or generally do "what works". I'm white but my wife is Mexican. We're both very conservative in most ways. Her family is proud of the Christian conquest of Latin America and don't think they went far enough in the conquest. Far beyond the typical liberal American view of boo hoo for the "natives". Americans are not aware that many hispanics are more conservative than they think. The racial purity thing is not going to be very productive going forward. The Proud Boys were a model for the future in that regard.

What the boat is sailing on now though are Greco-Roman values, which is the basis of western civilization. Which is kind of important since the east tends to rely on oppression. Look at Russia and China today.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#938

Post by jasmer »

fortituded0002 wrote: post #613
chrisco255 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For #2, I would alter this to say: connections matter. We are more likely to pursue careers or interests if we know someone (and are friends with them or related to them) that is interested in the same thing or has had experience in the same thing.

That doesn't ring true for me. I was already pursuing careers and interests that my friends were pursuing. That didn't change anything for me mostly because my friends came from a very different background than me. It also doesn't solve issues like my old boss who opted not to have children because she wanted to move up the corporate ladder at a FAANG company. She said that there was no mental model on how to navigat…

That it 'doesn't apply to you' or 'everyone' really isn't the point here.

Obviously it doesn't apply to everyone.

Have you seen how many people in Hollywood have famous relatives in the industry?

It's the same for any industry.

It's very common.

Growing up, I wouldn't have fathomed what it meant to be a screen writer. I literally did not know what the job entailed, other than 'writing'. Nothing.

My Uncle was an Engineer, hanging out with him I saw how that worked, became interested a bit, ended up recognizing how important 'Math' etc. was, worked on a couple of related projects etc.. Eventually getting an internship because of a family member. It was a small favour but a big deal.

And even aside from opportunities, all of the small things, habits, perspective and behaviours of a class of people expected to perform certain functions.

Anyone can be whatever but it's far more likely that those who are exposed, who have role models, behind the scenes access, internships etc are going to get opportunities.

Representation does matter I think, that said it depends a lot on context. For politics, judicial system it matters existentially. In pop culture, especially for kids I think it's important that they 'see themselves' in roles. For a lot of things however I don't think it matters at all.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#939

Post by jasmer »

rajin444 wrote: post #295
fortituded0002 wrote: post #196

1. Everyone is the main character in their own story. This manifest in all sorts of ways - from people not being there when you need them the most, from friends dying off as soon as proximity changes, to how and why get people get promoted in jobs. This isn't necessarily bad, but if you don't know how to navigate this it can be quite painful and confusing. 2. Representation matters. I knew this for a long time, but i…

> 2. Representation matters. Strange, I had the opposite encounter. I realized the only thing keeping me from doing things was myself. There are definitely real barriers (hiring quotas, affirmative action, etc.) but without artificial constraints the only thing stopping you is you. You might feel a little uncomfortable but that's something easily overcome - and almost like a superpower when you realize you can overco…

"without artificial constraints the only thing stopping you is you."

To be a plumber, yes.

To be a Doctor, kind of.

To be anything really competitive, not really, no.

There is a reason startup and regular CEO's are way over-represented from upper middle class families, and not ultra poor classes.

If you don't grow up playing Golf (expensive), it's highly unlikely you're going to the PGA.

For the poor kids to even fathom they could do something, they need to be exposed to the concept in a material way, on the whole. Obviously it's not always the case but representation 'is a thing'. And of course it can be way overstated in importance in many cases.

Re: Ask HN: Concepts that clicked only years after you first encountered them?

#940

Post by zamadatix »

icelancer wrote: post #596
dudeinjapan wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do women and men do versus AI opponents, i.e. without any gender? Wonder if chess.com has the data?

We all get slaughtered. It's possible Magnus could make one draw with white against a not-current Stockfish on limited depth out of a hundred games, but that would be about the best any of us could do.

Chess engines support the concept of skill level. Pretty much any chess program or app supports this out of the box, such as the aforementioned chess.com. The only times they are run unhindered are for analysis, engine testing, or fun.
Post reply on HN