41–50 of 66 posts
This is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
Link to previous HN post which has a list of all ebooks Springer made available for free: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23520545 Has quite a few of the books mentioned in the post and the comments here.
This is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
Herman:
- ISL
- Hands on
- Chollet
- spark+desk
Miller:
- Grus
- thinks stats
- la done right
- bishop
- data intensiveThis is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
This is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
People good at (1) and bad at (2) write "PhD code" that may or may not be right but you can't tell because it's too disorganized. People good at (2) but bad at (1) get fine-ish looking numbers out of their good looking code but you can't tell whether it's right because they may have ignored or misunderstood fundamental assumptions and correctness of the underlying methods.
There are also seemingly tens of thousands of people on the market who have little experience in either but have adapted projects from examples online into their Github potfolio and put all of the relevant terms into their resume anyway.
I think most aspiring data scientists would be better served going with more introductory texts and really understanding them. Maybe Blitzstein and Hwang's "Introduction to Probability" and then McElreath's "Statistical Rethinking" or Wasserman's "All of Statistics" for people who need more stats.
I'm not even sure what to recommend for developing good software judgment and habits. There doesn't seem to be a shortcut for that. Maybe "Fluent Python" or "Effective Python" for Python people? No idea for the R ecosystem.
This is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
Seconding this comment. Based on experience in hiring data scientists and comparing notes with many others that hire data scientists, the most frequent gaps in knowledge are (1) statistics specifically and scientific computing in general and (2) disciplined software engineering. People good at (1) and bad at (2) write "PhD code" that may or may not be right but you can't tell because it's too disorganized. People goo…
This is a completely, utterly worthless list: the only things that belong on it are Grus (good for python), maybe Bishop (maybe; it's woefully out of date and light on details) and Hastie (his other book is vastly better). The "General interest" books are all horse shit. If you're a pythonista, you should buy Wes McKinney's book. If you're not, you should buy John Mount and Nina Zumel's "Practical data science" which…
Seconding this comment. Based on experience in hiring data scientists and comparing notes with many others that hire data scientists, the most frequent gaps in knowledge are (1) statistics specifically and scientific computing in general and (2) disciplined software engineering. People good at (1) and bad at (2) write "PhD code" that may or may not be right but you can't tell because it's too disorganized. People goo…
I just assume anyone who calls themselves a data scientist is going to be a shit tier programmer who needs to improve over time at this point. The exceptions kind of prove the rule. Imposing test-driven discipline will cure some of the worst tendencies.
I don't have good references on stats and linear regression tier data science, but I'll take someone who understand the basics (I dunno, calculating useful moments from empirical distributions, feature selection in linreg) over some weenie who has some cribbed ipython file in his githubs who claims to understand Hastie.