4 ms·

> It's actually pretty simple The explanation then goes on to be very complex. e.g. "it can only express fractions that use a prime factor of the base". Pleas

> It's actually pretty simple The explanation then goes on to be very complex. e.g. "it can only express fractions that use a prime factor of the base". Please don't say things like this when explaining things to people, it makes them feel stupid if it doesn't click with the first explanation. I suggest instead "It's actually rather interesting".

headmelted 7y ago
Ditto as I now feel stupid. I read the rest of your reply but I also haven’t let go of the possibility that we’re both (or precisely 100.000000001% of us collectively) are as thick as a stump.
- jonny_eh 7y ago
  I learned it in college, but immediately forgot it after the exam. Why? It wasn't simple.
- omar_a1 7y ago
  To be fair, this is also done in every other STEM field, and CS is no exception. We could all learn a lot more from each other if everything wasn't a contest all the time.
tomca32 7y ago
The problem is that almost everything is simple once you understand it. Once you understand something, you think it's pretty simple to explain it. On the other hand, people say "it's actually pretty simple" to encourage someone to listen to the explanation rather than to give up before they even heard anything, as we often do.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  I understand prime factors just fine, but I'd never think it's "simple" to bring them up when I'm explaining how decimal points work.
hyperpape 7y ago
I rather like http://fabiensanglard.net/floating_point_visually_explained/ http://fabiensanglard.net/floating_point_visually_explained/
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  It's nice but it's extremely overkill for understanding this particular problem.
ggggtez 7y ago
>Why does this happen? It's actually rather interesting. Did the text change in the last 15 minutes?
- omar_a1 7y ago
  It has! See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21687225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21687225
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
throwaway40324 7y ago
Thanks for this. Yep, I've thrown 10,000 round house kicks and can teach you to do one. It's so easy. In reality, it will be super awkward, possibly hurt, and you'll fall on your ass one or more times trying to do it.
4ntonius8lock 7y ago
For including words in a sale pitch, I'd agree. But this isn't a sales pitch. Some people are just bad at things. The explanation on that page require grade school levels of math. I think math that's taught in grade school can be objectively called simple. Some people suck at math. That's ok. I'm very geeky. I get geeky things. Many times geeky things can be very simple to me. I went to a dance lesson. I'm terribly uncoordinated physically. They taught me a very 'simple' dance step. The class got it right away. The more physically able got it in 3 minutes. It took me a long time to get, having to repeat the beginner class many times. Instead of being self absorbed and expect the rest of the world to anticipate every one of my possible ego-dystonic sensibilities, I simply accepted I'm not good at that. It makes it easier for me and for the rest of the world. The reality is, just like the explanation and the dance step, they are simple because they are relatively simple for the field. I think such over-sensitivity is based on a combination of expecting never to encounter ego-dystonic events/words, which is unrealistic and removes many/most growth opportunities in life, and the idea that things we don't know can be simple (basically, reality is complicated). I think we've gotten so used to catering to the lowest common denominator, we've forgotten that it's ok for people to feel stupid/ugly/silly/embarrassed/etc. Those bad feelings are normal, feeling them is ok, and they should help guide us in life, not be something to run from or get upset if someone didn't anticipate your ego-dystonic reaction to objectively correct usage of words.
- mffnbs 7y ago
  When faced with criticism about your lack of inclusivity, what's to gain by doubling down in order to intentionally exclude people? The argument you are presenting always feels disingenuous because you imply that there is something lost in the efforts to be more inclusive. The idea that you care about the growth of people you are actively excluding doesn't make a whole lot of sense. In this example we're talking about word choice. The over-sensitivity from my point of view is in the person who takes offense that someone criticized their language and refuses to adapt out of some feigned interest for the disadvantaged party. The parent succinctly critiqued the word choice of the author and offered an alternative that doesn't detract from the message in the slightest. The lowest common denominator is the person who throws their arms up when offered valid criticism.
erikwiffin 7y ago
Thanks for the suggestion. I've updated the text.
- jonny_eh 7y ago
  Awesome, thanks!
Tade0 7y ago
I had to use google translate for this one, because I didn't suspect the translation to my language to be so literal. My take is that this sentence is badly worded. How do these fractions specifically use those prime factors? Apparently the idea is that a fraction 1/N, where N is a prime factor of the base, is rational in that base. So for base 10, at least 1/2 and 1/5 have to be rational. And given that a product of rational numbers is rational, no matter what combination of those two you multiply, you'll get a number rational in base 10, so 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 is rational, (1/2)^3 = 1/8 is rational etc. Same thing goes for the sum of course. So apparently those fractions use those prime factors by being a product of their reciprocals, which isn't mentioned here but should have been.
gpderetta 7y ago
there are only two kind of problems, trivial problems and those that you don't know how to solve (yet).

headmelted 7y ago

Ditto as I now feel stupid. I read the rest of your reply but I also haven’t let go of the possibility that we’re both (or precisely 100.000000001% of us collectively) are as thick as a stump.

jonny_eh 7y ago
I learned it in college, but immediately forgot it after the exam. Why? It wasn't simple.
omar_a1 7y ago
To be fair, this is also done in every other STEM field, and CS is no exception. We could all learn a lot more from each other if everything wasn't a contest all the time.

tomca32 7y ago

The problem is that almost everything is simple once you understand it. Once you understand something, you think it's pretty simple to explain it. On the other hand, people say "it's actually pretty simple" to encourage someone to listen to the explanation rather than to give up before they even heard anything, as we often do.

Dylan16807 7y ago
I understand prime factors just fine, but I'd never think it's "simple" to bring them up when I'm explaining how decimal points work.

hyperpape 7y ago

I rather like http://fabiensanglard.net/floating_point_visually_explained/ http://fabiensanglard.net/floating_point_visually_explained/

Dylan16807 7y ago
It's nice but it's extremely overkill for understanding this particular problem.

ggggtez 7y ago

>Why does this happen? It's actually rather interesting. Did the text change in the last 15 minutes?

omar_a1 7y ago
It has! See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21687225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21687225
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

throwaway40324 7y ago

Thanks for this. Yep, I've thrown 10,000 round house kicks and can teach you to do one. It's so easy. In reality, it will be super awkward, possibly hurt, and you'll fall on your ass one or more times trying to do it.

4ntonius8lock 7y ago

For including words in a sale pitch, I'd agree. But this isn't a sales pitch. Some people are just bad at things. The explanation on that page require grade school levels of math. I think math that's taught in grade school can be objectively called simple. Some people suck at math. That's ok. I'm very geeky. I get geeky things. Many times geeky things can be very simple to me. I went to a dance lesson. I'm terribly uncoordinated physically. They taught me a very 'simple' dance step. The class got it right away. The more physically able got it in 3 minutes. It took me a long time to get, having to repeat the beginner class many times. Instead of being self absorbed and expect the rest of the world to anticipate every one of my possible ego-dystonic sensibilities, I simply accepted I'm not good at that. It makes it easier for me and for the rest of the world. The reality is, just like the explanation and the dance step, they are simple because they are relatively simple for the field. I think such over-sensitivity is based on a combination of expecting never to encounter ego-dystonic events/words, which is unrealistic and removes many/most growth opportunities in life, and the idea that things we don't know can be simple (basically, reality is complicated). I think we've gotten so used to catering to the lowest common denominator, we've forgotten that it's ok for people to feel stupid/ugly/silly/embarrassed/etc. Those bad feelings are normal, feeling them is ok, and they should help guide us in life, not be something to run from or get upset if someone didn't anticipate your ego-dystonic reaction to objectively correct usage of words.

mffnbs 7y ago
When faced with criticism about your lack of inclusivity, what's to gain by doubling down in order to intentionally exclude people? The argument you are presenting always feels disingenuous because you imply that there is something lost in the efforts to be more inclusive. The idea that you care about the growth of people you are actively excluding doesn't make a whole lot of sense. In this example we're talking about word choice. The over-sensitivity from my point of view is in the person who takes offense that someone criticized their language and refuses to adapt out of some feigned interest for the disadvantaged party. The parent succinctly critiqued the word choice of the author and offered an alternative that doesn't detract from the message in the slightest. The lowest common denominator is the person who throws their arms up when offered valid criticism.

erikwiffin 7y ago

Thanks for the suggestion. I've updated the text.

jonny_eh 7y ago
Awesome, thanks!

Tade0 7y ago

I had to use google translate for this one, because I didn't suspect the translation to my language to be so literal. My take is that this sentence is badly worded. How do these fractions specifically use those prime factors? Apparently the idea is that a fraction 1/N, where N is a prime factor of the base, is rational in that base. So for base 10, at least 1/2 and 1/5 have to be rational. And given that a product of rational numbers is rational, no matter what combination of those two you multiply, you'll get a number rational in base 10, so 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 is rational, (1/2)^3 = 1/8 is rational etc. Same thing goes for the sum of course. So apparently those fractions use those prime factors by being a product of their reciprocals, which isn't mentioned here but should have been.

gpderetta 7y ago

there are only two kind of problems, trivial problems and those that you don't know how to solve (yet).