71–80 of 104 posts
> In fact, this is merely an extension of a ploy used by children on a playground: "Oh yeah? I could have done that if I wanted to." Or by adult professionals on Hacker News.
What a lame comment. I could have written one better If I had the time!
This is pretty awful, as in mean. Why would you deliberately want to insult someone who hasn't done anything to you? If it's getting them back sure, but as sport? Just cruel. Despite all the equations, it seems to me that your work didn't require any real mathematical sophistication. Did I miss something? (This is an especially good ploy if you observe others struggling to understand the talk because they will not wa…
If the author did not intend for it to be a joke, you can make the conclusion that the author has psychopathic tendencies.
> In fact, this is merely an extension of a ploy used by children on a playground: "Oh yeah? I could have done that if I wanted to." Or by adult professionals on Hacker News.
I had an insufferable coworker who doubled down on that attitude. If he hadn't thought of something, instead of just saying he could have done it, he'd start rambling about why it was a bad idea, and that he was smart for choosing not to do it. His whole attitude was "I know everything, and if I don't know it, it's because it's not worth knowing". Worst part was the non-technical management ate it up because he was s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had an insufferable coworker who doubled down on that attitude. If he hadn't thought of something, instead of just saying he could have done it, he'd start rambling about why it was a bad idea, and that he was smart for choosing not to do it. His whole attitude was "I know everything, and if I don't know it, it's because it's not worth knowing". Worst part was the non-technical management ate it up because he was s…
So how do you productively deal with this? There’s got to be a way, I just don’t know what it is. The worse form of this is when they: 1) make poor choices faster than you can catch up 2) have a less senior team (in ability, not title) that can’t see more than a couple commits ahead to keep the damage in check.
Explain it in your exit interview.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried Rust a while ago (I do mainly Python) but not for long enough to get my head around it (the borrow checker). Is it now past the peak hype cycle, or do people still love it?
I learned it a while back during some huge hype and put it down for a while after slow, minor, painful success. I recently came back and it feels much improved, and my troubles with the borrow checker seem to finally be something I have overcome. I think it will continue to be loved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you browse r/MachineLearning, you will see many people complaining about unnecessarily convoluted mathematics that are literally there to appease reviewers and don't actually say anything useful.
In my understanding this comes from the fact that many ML is more engineering than science but wants to be seen (or is reviewed as) theoretical research. So it fits the situation in the article even better.
Yes, there may be solid math behind it that says “if your problem is of type T, this algorithm will get within Foo of the optimal solution in O(n log n) time”, but the problem is that nobody can tell whether a given real-world problem is of type T. Yet, people happily run the algorithm and if it works, it works.
This essay seems to have been published 20 years ago. In the modern version, the experimentalists use terms like "deep learning" and "neural nets" and the theorists use terms like "fuck all this deep learning bullshit"