4 ms·

I'm not sure I've ever used anything more complex than Algebra 1 from IIRC freshman year of high school. Ever. Certainly I'm more likely to go beyond that doing

I'm not sure I've ever used anything more complex than Algebra 1 from IIRC freshman year of high school. Ever. Certainly I'm more likely to go beyond that doing house projects, than at work. I think I've used trig once or twice for house projects, but by "used" I mean "plugged some numbers into the relevant calculator, without needing to actually know the formula", and if that counts I guess I also do advanced cryptography and all kinds of other crazy stuff daily, like when I used GPS or access a web page over SSL. Far and away the most useful math I was taught in school was the memorization of basic "math facts" (e.g. multiplication tables), including and especially the ability to do mental math with fractions and percentages. This is the stuff (rote memorization) that professional mathematicians seem to hate and want to get rid of or downplay, even calling it "not actually math" et c. Easily the best use of my time in any math class, ever, though I didn't know it at the time. As far as any utility it had in "shaping my mind", my four semesters of college French were at least as useful for that as my... oh, I dunno, 28 semesters of math? Youtube and reading blogs has been more useful for developing my mind in the way people usually mean when they say that's what learning math's good for, even if you don't use it. I also never use that [edit: the French, I mean] unfortunately, so like math, I've lost almost all of it. I'd guess 99% of the math I use in a given year could be done by an average 5th grader. Every now and then I take a stab at (re-)learning some math, but it's just so hard to justify the time. What am I going to do with it, really, unless I put in thousands of study-hours to get really good at some niche? Nothing. So I usually end up distracted by some fun-but-not-enlightening recreational math, which is fine, but about as improving as solving Sudoku puzzles. Paid software developer since age 15, BS degree in computer science, approaching age 40.

tombert 5y ago
> This is the stuff (rote memorization) that professional mathematicians seem to hate and want to get rid of or downplay, even calling it "not actually math" I'm not a mathematician, but my understanding of them saying that is because that's more computation than mathematical thinking. You're not getting an understanding of what's actually happening when you've memorized 4x5=20, all you're doing is creating basic word-mapping. Maybe I just lived a very different life, but even though I'm reasonably good with my times tables, I still almost always use a calculator/spreadsheet/spotlight/phone to do all but the most basic of computations. Why wouldn't I? I always have a supercomputer in my pocket that is substantially more likely to be correct than a twenty year old memory of fourth grade. > I'd guess 99% of the math I use in a given year could be done by an average 5th grader. I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I guess I'm just going to say it; in the 25 years you've been a developer, have you not tried to make a game? Some machine learning? Data science? I'm not saying you need to be the next Guass or anything, but all of those require more advanced math than what I was taught in fifth grade. To make a platformer game, you have to know enough to do a basic Euler integration. To do machine learning, you have to know enough to at least know what a Sigmoid is [1]. To do data science, you have to understand basic statistical methods (E.g. ANOVA, Chi Squared, Student T Tests). Maybe you were taught all this stuff in fifth grade, but I don't think that the majority of students where. [1] I don't do machine learning for a living, I know that the Sigmoid has fallen out of favor but I think my point still stands.
- handrous 5y ago
  > I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I guess I'm just going to say it; in the 25 years you've been a developer, have you not tried to make a game? Yes! But there are lots of kinds of games, and none of my attempts were in 3d or involved physics. Also I've learned that without real users beating down my door for a feature I will not ever finish a project, so I've given up on "fun" coding entirely and haven't written any kind of game whatsoever in probably 15+ years. It's a waste of time for me, as I will not finish it. I need a guaranteed smiling face at the end of the process, or there's no chance I'll get far. If I decided I really wanted to make a game these days, unless unusual physics were vital to it, I'd probably let an existing engine take care of all that for me—why would I code it from scratch, when the point is to have a finished game, not manually write as much of it as possible at the expense of making it take longer? > Some machine learning? Never had a reason. I'll learn it if I ever have one. My usual approach to anything a whole bunch of people are doing, but I'm not, is to assume that some of them must be idiots, and they're doing OK, so, since I'm an idiot, I'll pick it up just fine, too—if I ever need to. This approach has yet to fail me. I've yet to try to do something new that lots of other people are doing and found that no, in fact I'm too dumb to pick it up pretty fast. See above about needing someone who wants the output of my work, before I can reliably finish projects. There's no way I'm going to complete a "learning project" in machine learning, for its own sake, unless I'm just very interested in whatever's being learned—and I just don't really care that much about machine learning. I get the gist, so it's not some big mystery to me how it works, OK, that's neat. I'll dig deeper if I ever have even the slightest reason to. Just haven't yet. > Data science? Not done anything interesting, or "real" data science. Fixing up data, yes. Doing very simple math on it, sure. If I ever knew what any of these: "ANOVA, Chi Squared, Student T Tests" are I've long since forgotten. Certainly never used any.
- abecedarius 5y ago
  > To make a platformer game, you have to know enough to do a basic Euler integration. I coded that kind of stuff when I was like 12, in BASIC, with no idea about integration as far as I can remember now. I think I'd read about simulating a bouncing ball in a basic programming book somewhere? This did help with getting the ideas about calculus later. Added: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/hc_pers_comp_for_children.pdf http://www.vpri.org/pdf/hc_pers_comp_for_children.pdf has a more detailed scenario of kids coding Euler integration without knowing it's called that.

tombert 5y ago

> This is the stuff (rote memorization) that professional mathematicians seem to hate and want to get rid of or downplay, even calling it "not actually math" I'm not a mathematician, but my understanding of them saying that is because that's more computation than mathematical thinking. You're not getting an understanding of what's actually happening when you've memorized 4x5=20, all you're doing is creating basic word-mapping. Maybe I just lived a very different life, but even though I'm reasonably good with my times tables, I still almost always use a calculator/spreadsheet/spotlight/phone to do all but the most basic of computations. Why wouldn't I? I always have a supercomputer in my pocket that is substantially more likely to be correct than a twenty year old memory of fourth grade. > I'd guess 99% of the math I use in a given year could be done by an average 5th grader. I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I guess I'm just going to say it; in the 25 years you've been a developer, have you not tried to make a game? Some machine learning? Data science? I'm not saying you need to be the next Guass or anything, but all of those require more advanced math than what I was taught in fifth grade. To make a platformer game, you have to know enough to do a basic Euler integration. To do machine learning, you have to know enough to at least know what a Sigmoid is [1]. To do data science, you have to understand basic statistical methods (E.g. ANOVA, Chi Squared, Student T Tests). Maybe you were taught all this stuff in fifth grade, but I don't think that the majority of students where. [1] I don't do machine learning for a living, I know that the Sigmoid has fallen out of favor but I think my point still stands.

handrous 5y ago
> I don't mean to come off as a jerk, but I guess I'm just going to say it; in the 25 years you've been a developer, have you not tried to make a game? Yes! But there are lots of kinds of games, and none of my attempts were in 3d or involved physics. Also I've learned that without real users beating down my door for a feature I will not ever finish a project, so I've given up on "fun" coding entirely and haven't written any kind of game whatsoever in probably 15+ years. It's a waste of time for me, as I will not finish it. I need a guaranteed smiling face at the end of the process, or there's no chance I'll get far. If I decided I really wanted to make a game these days, unless unusual physics were vital to it, I'd probably let an existing engine take care of all that for me—why would I code it from scratch, when the point is to have a finished game, not manually write as much of it as possible at the expense of making it take longer? > Some machine learning? Never had a reason. I'll learn it if I ever have one. My usual approach to anything a whole bunch of people are doing, but I'm not, is to assume that some of them must be idiots, and they're doing OK, so, since I'm an idiot, I'll pick it up just fine, too—if I ever need to. This approach has yet to fail me. I've yet to try to do something new that lots of other people are doing and found that no, in fact I'm too dumb to pick it up pretty fast. See above about needing someone who wants the output of my work, before I can reliably finish projects. There's no way I'm going to complete a "learning project" in machine learning, for its own sake, unless I'm just very interested in whatever's being learned—and I just don't really care that much about machine learning. I get the gist, so it's not some big mystery to me how it works, OK, that's neat. I'll dig deeper if I ever have even the slightest reason to. Just haven't yet. > Data science? Not done anything interesting, or "real" data science. Fixing up data, yes. Doing very simple math on it, sure. If I ever knew what any of these: "ANOVA, Chi Squared, Student T Tests" are I've long since forgotten. Certainly never used any.
abecedarius 5y ago
> To make a platformer game, you have to know enough to do a basic Euler integration. I coded that kind of stuff when I was like 12, in BASIC, with no idea about integration as far as I can remember now. I think I'd read about simulating a bouncing ball in a basic programming book somewhere? This did help with getting the ideas about calculus later. Added: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/hc_pers_comp_for_children.pdf http://www.vpri.org/pdf/hc_pers_comp_for_children.pdf has a more detailed scenario of kids coding Euler integration without knowing it's called that.