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

Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

johnsalvatier.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 304 posts

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#61

Post by BatFastard »

woliveirajr wrote: post #49
KineticLensman wrote: post #29

There is an excellent example of this type of fiddly detail in Liz England's 2014 blog post about the problems of doors in video games [0]. She identifies about 20 questions you can ask about as a door (as a game designer) and then about 30 different roles (from sound designers [1] to monetization director[2]) who might be involved. Her post works really well because the example is so mundane but the questions are ve…

> Network Programmer: “Do all the players need to see the door open at the same time?” Brings me the question on wheter the "reality" is the same for everybody.

The answer is NO.

We all have our personal realities that operate on their own timeline. Only when you are playing an MMO next to someone do you get a chance to notice it. But it exists both in game and in real life.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#62

Post by alextheparrot »

sorokod wrote: post #57
mjburgess wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well. People still don't know, but now they have enough information to seem as-if they do. Understanding is not a matter of a google. It's a decade of relevant experience. You might beat the PhD to the factoid phrase, but when you come to employ the fact in the relevant problem you won't even know where to begin or even what it really meant. People aren't exercising their ability to distinguish parroting from underst…

In the same spirit there is the cheapening of the concept of "research". Often the statement "I did some research" means that some googling has occurred.

I feel it is less directly cheapening all research and more bifurcating the term between engaged and unengaged audiences. The audience must decide when searching becomes researching, which I doubt is the second time you are feeling lucky.

If I google, find a primary source with reasonable data, and form an argument based on that, then I’ve done research. It was simply easier based on the Internet, but the research is not proof-of-work - a well-supported conclusion is just that no matter the effort.

On the other hand, I google, copy and paste the first link and parrot what it said - then I have indeed cheapened it. I’ve skipped the evaluation step of researching, wherein I convince myself of the “facts” of the past and I’ve also failed to extend any new thoughts as we’ve just parroted the argument.

My main point being, to a critical reader only “bad” research is cheap. It is also the duty of the audience, just as much the researcher, to evaluate what they read critically and respond with skepticism.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#63

Post by mhb »

k__ wrote: post #41
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #10

Something I've noticed now that we're all communicating online in written form: a lack of people saying "I don't know" It seems that everybody knows everything. Whatever the issue, a little bit of Googling and suddenly you know all there is to know. Even more wondrous, no matter what position you take on anything, some more search engine Kung Fu and you can find a hundred people willing to support you with arguments,…

I think we have two problems at the moment. 1. Being right doesn't mean being smart. I met many people in my life that were smart or dumb, but their success had nothing to do with this. You can do the right things by accident. 2. Being rich often removes the need of being smart to varying degrees. People want to help you getting richer if they get a piece of the pie.

Competent Elites - The World is Stratified by Genuine Competence

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16186279

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#64

Post by pluma »

shoover wrote: post #60
codingdave wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I jump into a thread, on any site, just to say I don't know? There are thousands of threads just on HN that I just let scroll by without participating because I don't know enough to add to the discussion. Explicitly calling out my lack of knowledge on every thread would serve no purpose to anybody. Online written communications will never follow the same patterns as direct communication, and that is a good…

It is absurd how people actually do this all the time in Amazon product questions. Will it work with my Samsung phone? "I don't know." Does it come with batteries? "I think it did."

My personal favourite is "I bought this three years ago and don't have it anymore. I don't remember."

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#65

Post by harpiaharpyja »

shoover wrote: post #60
codingdave wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I jump into a thread, on any site, just to say I don't know? There are thousands of threads just on HN that I just let scroll by without participating because I don't know enough to add to the discussion. Explicitly calling out my lack of knowledge on every thread would serve no purpose to anybody. Online written communications will never follow the same patterns as direct communication, and that is a good…

It is absurd how people actually do this all the time in Amazon product questions. Will it work with my Samsung phone? "I don't know." Does it come with batteries? "I think it did."

I'm guessing that's because Amazon sends out emails explicitly asking people to answer questions on their past purchases. And for some reason, this makes some subset of people feel obligated to reply even though it makes no sense.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#66

Post by slfnflctd »

simias wrote: post #54

This article points out exactly why even though I like to tinker with a lot of stuff my main hobby is always programming. Because programming is more akin to writing down maths than building a staircase. Algorithms don't warp because of humidity, algorithms don't have leakage current. Sure computers have their quirks (overflows, floating point issues, UB etc...) but it's still a finite amount of knowledge unlike the…

In fun, a contrary perspective: at least with woodworking tools, they don't become obsolete in 2-5 years just from laying dormant on the shelf!

Seriously, though, couldn't agree more, I've said some variation on everything you mentioned for many years. Especially the mess part. I would add the risk of personal injury, too.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#67

Post by karmakaze »

> The important details you haven’t noticed are invisible to you, and the details you have noticed seem completely obvious and you see right through them. This all makes makes it difficult to imagine how you could be missing something important

This. And how you could be pointing out something so self evident and it falls on deaf ears.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#68

Post by shoover »

harpiaharpyja wrote: post #65
shoover wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absurd how people actually do this all the time in Amazon product questions. Will it work with my Samsung phone? "I don't know." Does it come with batteries? "I think it did."

I'm guessing that's because Amazon sends out emails explicitly asking people to answer questions on their past purchases. And for some reason, this makes some subset of people feel obligated to reply even though it makes no sense.

I think you're right. That sounds exactly like something amazon would do and how people would respond. I must have turned those emails off, which makes seeing the answers utterly stupefying.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#69

Post by dekhn »

jasode wrote: post #53

>Do you remember the insights that were crucial in learning to ride a bike or drive? The author mentioned bicycles and inadvertently missed an opportunity to show another "unknown reality" that beautifully illustrates his point. Consider typical adults (not physicists) with 20+ years of bicycle riding. If you ask them, "how does a bicycle turn?" , they'd respond that "you just lean into the direction of the turn and…

A long part of my scientific career has been unpacking simple statements about things like bike riding, and finding the underlying process is subtle, and reveals many interesting things.

When I was a kid, I had a teacher who said that cutting paper wasn't a chemical change- no bonds were broken. That seemed odd to me, but after I had a PhD, I understood a few things better. That when you cut paper, mostly hydrogen bonds- bonds, but a particularly weak form of bonds- are broken, but threre is enough kinetic energy to break some covalent bonds too. This turns out to have huge implications (besides the fact that the teacher was wrong).

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#70

Post by kthartic »

shoover wrote: post #60
codingdave wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I jump into a thread, on any site, just to say I don't know? There are thousands of threads just on HN that I just let scroll by without participating because I don't know enough to add to the discussion. Explicitly calling out my lack of knowledge on every thread would serve no purpose to anybody. Online written communications will never follow the same patterns as direct communication, and that is a good…

It is absurd how people actually do this all the time in Amazon product questions. Will it work with my Samsung phone? "I don't know." Does it come with batteries? "I think it did."

It's because Amazon emails everyone (who bought that product) every time someone asks a question. The subject is "John Doe: Can you answer this question about ...". I've had this email a few times. Some people (I'm guessing old/non-tech savvy) assume someone has asked them directly, and so feel the need to reply.
Post reply on HN