Live data from Hacker News

Learn R two minutes at a time

twotorials.com

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#31
post #26
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But couldn't R have applications in business (industry)? A businessperson once asked me about R after he read a non-technical article about it in a major newspaper. This person has never been in academia. Why was he curious? What could he possibly see in R? I see R as a "disruptor" to the market that SPSS has had under lock and key for as long as I can remember. Perhaps statistics has utility outside of academics? Ma…

Certainly it does. Perhaps I shouldn't have emphasized academics so much. Anyone who does in-depth statistical analysis can use R. It is equivalent to SPSS, SAS, and matlab in its applicability, plus its free. People involved in 'big data' and serious analytics in business are already using R a lot of the time. The other group of people in business who use the closed source applications above, however, aren't as tech…

Regarding R for BigData, do you think R is going to continue to be a stable of the analytical toolset as data sizes continues to grow?

I use R to prototype machine learning techniques on a small set of data, or visualize some summary statistics. But if I want to run K-Means Clustering or Support Vector Machine algorithms on 1,000,000,000 rows of data, I've found that running R on Hadoop is tricky. There are some libraries out there ( for example, RHadoop https://github.com/RevolutionAnalytics/RHadoop/wiki/rmr ) but they require writing your algorithm in such a manner that algorithms must be adapted to run within map() and reduce() functions. My understanding is that the built-in functions that make R so useful will often not adapt well to a mapreduce algorithm.

From what I've seen, once an algorithm is prototyped in something like R/Matlab, if the data size warrants it, it's best to re-write the algorithm in Java MapReduce or use Apache Mahout.

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#32
post #25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're doing in-depth statistical analysis, there's not really any reason to know anything about R. It isn't a useful general purpose language. That is to say, while your suggestion is certainly valid and appreciable, the reason why there are rarely primers for content about R (specifically) is that the intended audience is primarily academic, where the audience is already familiar with the technology. if you…

But couldn't R have applications in business (industry)? A businessperson once asked me about R after he read a non-technical article about it in a major newspaper. This person has never been in academia. Why was he curious? What could he possibly see in R? I see R as a "disruptor" to the market that SPSS has had under lock and key for as long as I can remember. Perhaps statistics has utility outside of academics? Ma…

It does. We use it in insurance more and more.

It is not a great general purpose language. I use it to create automated reports and analyses. It's got every statistical test under the sun in the libraries, and the graphs are very flexible, provided you are willing to tweak a lot.

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#33
post #31
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly it does. Perhaps I shouldn't have emphasized academics so much. Anyone who does in-depth statistical analysis can use R. It is equivalent to SPSS, SAS, and matlab in its applicability, plus its free. People involved in 'big data' and serious analytics in business are already using R a lot of the time. The other group of people in business who use the closed source applications above, however, aren't as tech…

Regarding R for BigData, do you think R is going to continue to be a stable of the analytical toolset as data sizes continues to grow? I use R to prototype machine learning techniques on a small set of data, or visualize some summary statistics. But if I want to run K-Means Clustering or Support Vector Machine algorithms on 1,000,000,000 rows of data, I've found that running R on Hadoop is tricky. There are some libr…

or C.

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#34
post #17

I might be interested in learning R if I knew what it was. Even the webpage doesn't explain what it is until you watch one of the videos. I see this all the time on software-related websites. They launch into the technical details without even one sentence about what it is. I could give a whole bunch of examples here but I think everyone has experienced this. Please include something like the following on the webpage…

That's probably my single biggest complaint about Web projects in general. The failure to describe, briefly and clearly, what a tool does.

Not a problem in this case (I've dabbled with R for over a decade), but I definitely feel your pain and agree with your criticism.

The HN default of using a vague headline and often linking directly to a site with little or no explanatory context (the fact that you can either post a link, or text, but not both) really doesn't help this.

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#36
post #26
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But couldn't R have applications in business (industry)? A businessperson once asked me about R after he read a non-technical article about it in a major newspaper. This person has never been in academia. Why was he curious? What could he possibly see in R? I see R as a "disruptor" to the market that SPSS has had under lock and key for as long as I can remember. Perhaps statistics has utility outside of academics? Ma…

Certainly it does. Perhaps I shouldn't have emphasized academics so much. Anyone who does in-depth statistical analysis can use R. It is equivalent to SPSS, SAS, and matlab in its applicability, plus its free. People involved in 'big data' and serious analytics in business are already using R a lot of the time. The other group of people in business who use the closed source applications above, however, aren't as tech…

RCommander is quite helpful: http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Misc/Rcmdr/

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#37
post #28
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly it does. Perhaps I shouldn't have emphasized academics so much. Anyone who does in-depth statistical analysis can use R. It is equivalent to SPSS, SAS, and matlab in its applicability, plus its free. People involved in 'big data' and serious analytics in business are already using R a lot of the time. The other group of people in business who use the closed source applications above, however, aren't as tech…

I can remember when SPSS had no GUI. It seemed much more responsive back then, running on a VAX. If we can achieve bigger and better things by teaching a new generation of users how to use the command line again, maybe it's worth considering? No, absolutely not. Totally unrealistic. Forget I mentioned it. My favorite thing about R is that is has no GUI. To me it makes it more powerful.

There is a difference between an optional GUI and a mandatory one. I don't see why an optional GUI would hurt R, but I have almost no experience in this area. Would you mind explaining?

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#38
post #37
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can remember when SPSS had no GUI. It seemed much more responsive back then, running on a VAX. If we can achieve bigger and better things by teaching a new generation of users how to use the command line again, maybe it's worth considering? No, absolutely not. Totally unrealistic. Forget I mentioned it. My favorite thing about R is that is has no GUI. To me it makes it more powerful.

There is a difference between an optional GUI and a mandatory one. I don't see why an optional GUI would hurt R, but I have almost no experience in this area. Would you mind explaining?

[deleted]

Re: Learn R two minutes at a time

#39
post #37
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can remember when SPSS had no GUI. It seemed much more responsive back then, running on a VAX. If we can achieve bigger and better things by teaching a new generation of users how to use the command line again, maybe it's worth considering? No, absolutely not. Totally unrealistic. Forget I mentioned it. My favorite thing about R is that is has no GUI. To me it makes it more powerful.

There is a difference between an optional GUI and a mandatory one. I don't see why an optional GUI would hurt R, but I have almost no experience in this area. Would you mind explaining?

I never said an optional GUI would hurt R. (I think optional GUI's are a smart idea.) I was referring to SAS and SPSS. They have mandatory GUI's.
Post reply on HN