3 ms·

That issue is unhelpful. Yes, no good tests, but how about suggesting ways it can actually be improved? Why are devs such bores when it comes to things like thi

That issue is unhelpful. Yes, no good tests, but how about suggesting ways it can actually be improved? Why are devs such bores when it comes to things like this? They have released the model, review it and suggest improvements! Don't grandstand "We, the undersigned etc etc" as if that's going to help improve the codebase in the slightest. Carmack is OK with it, he's put his name to reviewing it. That's not to excuse the bad testing, but he hasn't thrown his hands up and run away. He worked with them constructively to make it possible for us to even see it! Be more like Carmack. EDIT: Also be like this person: https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/161 https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/161 Helpful, constructive and the developers engaged with them.

JauntyHatAngle 6y ago
I fear that this area is too divisive currently to allow for normal discourse. The downvoting in these kinds of topics have been atrocious on hacker News the last few weeks.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  HN is one of the increasing fewer places online where covid19 deniers can congregate.
  - lbeltrame 6y ago
    I personally don't like much the term "deniers", because there are a lot of unknowns on this virus and what it does, and there is no agreement on many fronts. Also, doing these generalizations groups together people with very questionable theories ("It's the 5G") with others that have more nuanced criticism. Personally (and yes, I am a scientist) try to look up whatever is said in the media, either by journalists or experts, no matter if the results end up matching 100% what it is said (often it is less, and on some cases there is no match). I think there should be fairly high standards of scientific rigor even in published code, especially if this might impact public policy actions, like we should expect high rigor in biological and epidemiological studies.
    - Gibbon1 6y ago
      I started using the term deniers because all of them are studiously ignoring something that doesn't pencil out. It doesn't matter if they are loony deniers, sciency deniers, I have a big brain tech bro deniers. The result is all the same. Garbage. Dangerous garbage.
renewiltord 6y ago
Carmack has different motivations. He has nothing to prove and simplistically looks to make things better. You can tell in his appearance on Joe Rogan. Most HN users are just publicly preening. It's like a Mechanical Turk GPT2. I actually doubt they can write code.
thu2111 6y ago
It's too late. The early buggy code was already used to drive decisions, and they refused to release it for a month and a half whilst they tried to fix the most embarrassing errors. Go click around GitHub. They screwed up a shuffle, there are uninitialised reads, RNG bugs, the works.

JauntyHatAngle 6y ago

I fear that this area is too divisive currently to allow for normal discourse. The downvoting in these kinds of topics have been atrocious on hacker News the last few weeks.

Gibbon1 6y ago
HN is one of the increasing fewer places online where covid19 deniers can congregate.
- lbeltrame 6y ago
  I personally don't like much the term "deniers", because there are a lot of unknowns on this virus and what it does, and there is no agreement on many fronts. Also, doing these generalizations groups together people with very questionable theories ("It's the 5G") with others that have more nuanced criticism. Personally (and yes, I am a scientist) try to look up whatever is said in the media, either by journalists or experts, no matter if the results end up matching 100% what it is said (often it is less, and on some cases there is no match). I think there should be fairly high standards of scientific rigor even in published code, especially if this might impact public policy actions, like we should expect high rigor in biological and epidemiological studies.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    I started using the term deniers because all of them are studiously ignoring something that doesn't pencil out. It doesn't matter if they are loony deniers, sciency deniers, I have a big brain tech bro deniers. The result is all the same. Garbage. Dangerous garbage.

renewiltord 6y ago

Carmack has different motivations. He has nothing to prove and simplistically looks to make things better. You can tell in his appearance on Joe Rogan. Most HN users are just publicly preening. It's like a Mechanical Turk GPT2. I actually doubt they can write code.

thu2111 6y ago

It's too late. The early buggy code was already used to drive decisions, and they refused to release it for a month and a half whilst they tried to fix the most embarrassing errors. Go click around GitHub. They screwed up a shuffle, there are uninitialised reads, RNG bugs, the works.