4 ms·

> It's not deliberately designed to keep people out Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? And surely you

> It's not deliberately designed to keep people out Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? And surely you must realize that it has this reputation for a reason? When I was a teenager and took my first calculus course, I struggled with summation for three days. When I finally went to my dad he looked at me funny and said "your teacher is an idiot, isn't he? It's a for loop." I had been writing for loops for seven years at that age. I almost cried. It was like a lightswitch. The problem was always that nobody had ever actually explained what the symbol meant in any practical way. Every piece of terminology was explained with other terminology, when there was absolutely no reason to do so. Mathematics has the reputation for impermeability and unwelcomingness for a reason. It's because you guys are ignoring us saying "we want to learn, please write out a cheat sheet" and saying "yes, but don't you see" instead of just building the easy on-ramp that every other field on earth has built . > > You might be tired of wandering into someone else's area of expertise and telling them: > > You must change! You must make it more accessible! No, we generally just fix the problem. If people are saying "this isn't accessible enough," we just work on it. I would like for you personally to be aware of Bret Victor's work. He's incredibly potent and clear on these topics. Programmers work really really hard on learnability and understandability. This is a big deal to us. That's why we can't understand why it's not a big deal to you. http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming/ http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming/ We have, in fact, mostly given up on waiting for you, and started to make our own tooling to understand your work, using obvious principles like live editors and witnessable effects. http://worrydream.com/MediaForThinkingTheUnthinkable/ http://worrydream.com/MediaForThinkingTheUnthinkable/ Edit: those are the talk notes. Wrong link, sorry. I should have used this instead: https://vimeo.com/67076984 https://vimeo.com/67076984 This is a big part of how we criticize ourselves, is for failing to provide the tooling to allow new modes of approach. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUv66718DII https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUv66718DII We frequently think of our programming languages as new modes for thought. This line of discussion is particularly popular in the Lisp, Haskell, and Forth communities, though it crops up at some level everywhere. We frequently think that the more opaque the language, the less useful it is in this way. That's why programming languages, which are arguably 70 years old as a field, have so much more powerful tools for teaching and explanation than math, which is literally older than spoken language You guys don't even have documentation extraction going yet. We have documentation where you have a little code box and you can type things and try it. You can screw with it. You can see what happens. This is why we care about things like Active Reading and explorable explanations. http://worrydream.com/ExplorableExplanations/ http://worrydream.com/ExplorableExplanations/ This is why we care about things like live reactive documents. It really changes your ability to intuitively understand things. http://worrydream.com/Tangle/ http://worrydream.com/Tangle/ Math hasn't grokked non-symbolic communication since Archimedes, that's why it took nearly two thousand years to catch up with him. We are asking you to come into step with the didactic tools of the modern world. It's not the 1850s anymore. We have better stuff than blackboards. Are these flat symbolic equations cutting it for you guys to communicate with one another? Sure. Are they cutting it for you guys to onboard new talent, or make your wealth available to the outside? No. (Do you realize that there is an outside to you, which isn't true of most technical fields anymore?) These problems are not unique to mathematics, of course. Formal logic is similar. Within my own field of programming, the AI field is similar, as is control theory, as tends to be database work. They don't want to open the doors. You have to spend six years earning it. But the hard truth is there are more difficult fields than mathematics that have managed to surmount these problems, such as physics (which no, is not applied mathematics,) and I think it might be time to stop protesting and start asking yourself "am I failing the next generation of mathematicians?" An example of who I believe to be genuinely good math communicators in the modern era are Three Blue One Brown. . > > Believe me, mathematicians are tired of non-mathematicians wandering up and saying: > > Look! Computer programs are easy and intuitive and everyone can understand them, even without training! Make math like that! Then fix the problem. It IS fixable. . > Do you really believe that math notation is deliberately designed to make it hard for people untrained in math to learn how to use it? Given the way you guys push back on being asked to write simple reference material? No, but I understand why they do. . > Do you really believe that no one has tried to make it more accessible? No. Instead, I believe that nobody has succeeded. Try to calm down a bit, won't you? People tried to explain Berkeley sockets in a simple way for 12 years before Beej showed up and succeeded. The Little Schemer was 16 years after Lisp. Explaining is one of the very hardest things that exists. We're not saying you didn't try! The battlefield is littered with the corpses of attempts to get past Flatland. We're just saying "you haven't succeeded yet and this is important. Keep trying." . > Do you really believe you know more about why math notation is what it is than mathematicians and trained mathematics educators do? No. The literal ask is for you to repair that. Crimeny.

Jensson 5y ago
> Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? I've never heard anyone make this accusation until I read it here on HN today. The reputation doesn't seem to be widespread. > Programmers work really really hard on learnability and understandability. This is a big deal to us. That's why we can't understand why it's not a big deal to you. How to better teach math is like one of the most studied topics in education since it is so extremely important for so many outcomes. People learn programming faster since programming is simply easier, not because more effort has been done to make programming easy. There hasn't, way more effort has been put into making math easy and the math we have is the results of all that work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematics_education_journals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematics_education_... > Given the way you guys push back on being asked to write simple reference material? Nobody pushes back on writing simple reference manuals. There are tons of simple reference manuals for math everywhere on the internet, in most math papers, in most math books, everywhere! Yet still people fail to understand it. Many billions has been put trying to improve math education, trying to find shortcuts, trying to do anything at all. You are simply ignorant thinking that there are some quick fix super easy to implement things that would magically make people understand math. There isn't. It is possible that math education could get improved, but it wont be a simple thing.
- JohnHaugeland 5y ago
  > > Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? > > I've never heard anyone make this accusation until I read it here on HN today. The reputation doesn't seem to be widespread. blinks really? It's kind of a famous thing. Teachers are taught how to cope with math phobia; other subjects (with the exception of dissection) generally do not create this effect. . > How to better teach math is like one of the most studied topics in education since it is so extremely Unsuccessful Many other disciplines are equally important and don't have the desperation for repair that math does It's so bad that it's gotten into popular music a dozen times; you can easily point to Tom Lehrer, Weird Al, even 2 Chainz for broaching the topic . > People learn programming faster since programming is simply easier Keep telling yourself that Remember who's cracking things like four coloring. . > There hasn't, way more effort has been put into making math easy and the math we have is the results of all that work. You seem not to be results focused. . > Nobody pushes back on writing simple reference manuals. The person I was responding to was. Three different people have with me in this thread alone. Notice that you've changed the topic to "reference manuals," which 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱 Ostensibly this is the part at which you launch into an explanation about how a simple cheat sheet that says things like " || usually means absolute value or magnitude" somehow isn't possible, even though it totally is Next you'll explain how simple summary symbols like that are somehow harder than Haskell, which was able to produce a cheat sheet just fine In reality, mathematicians just don't have the faintest clue how difficult other fields are, and are too busy patting themselves on the backs for their challenging intellects to realize that their work is under-used due to their inability to produce legends and keys . > Yet still people fail to understand it. You're not producing what's being requested, then you're surprised that what you're actually producing isn't working. . > trying to find shortcuts, trying to do anything at all. All that's being requested is a two page operator cheat sheet. If you'd stop wisely pontificating and just try it, you'd find it's really quite straightforward. I produced one for my students. It's just that my own education in mathematics only goes so far. 𝗜𝘁 𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁 You are doing the refusing you insist nobody's doing, right now . > You are simply ignorant thinking that there are some quick fix super easy to implement things Not really, no. I've succeeded at this. You are protesting against things that were not requested. Nobody asked for any "quick fixes." Nobody asked for any "magical make understand." These are things you said, not things I said. I said something very simple and very practical. Something that very much can be done. I want a two page PDF which puts operators next to their names, so the load on my memory is lower. Every time I ask that, some math fan goes on forever about how things I never asked for aren't possible, and ties that up with personal attacks. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗴𝘂𝘆𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Please keep the insults to yourself. Thanks. . > It is possible that math education could get improved Please stop trying to solve every problem. Nobody asked you to take on that Herculean task. What was actually requested was a simple two page PDF. That's a thing that a single person can do in an hour (well, maybe as a webpage, making an actual PDF is a hassle.) The constant attempt to change the topic to some greater thing blinds you to how easy fixing this actually is. The statisticians can do it: http://web.mit.edu/~csvoss/Public/usabo/stats_handout.pdf http://web.mit.edu/~csvoss/Public/usabo/stats_handout.pdf This isn't far off: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_mathematical_symbols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_mathematical_symbo... Seriously, nobody is saying "solve math education for all people." For `|x|` it would just say "absolute value, magnitude, length, or cardinality." It's a quick reference chart for people who already know the material but haven't actively used it for ten years, and to help know what to google for the rare cases where you don't. It doesn't teach anything. This shouldn't be a big deal, and people keep asking for it because it would *really* help

Jensson 5y ago

> Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? I've never heard anyone make this accusation until I read it here on HN today. The reputation doesn't seem to be widespread. > Programmers work really really hard on learnability and understandability. This is a big deal to us. That's why we can't understand why it's not a big deal to you. How to better teach math is like one of the most studied topics in education since it is so extremely important for so many outcomes. People learn programming faster since programming is simply easier, not because more effort has been done to make programming easy. There hasn't, way more effort has been put into making math easy and the math we have is the results of all that work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematics_education_journals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematics_education_... > Given the way you guys push back on being asked to write simple reference material? Nobody pushes back on writing simple reference manuals. There are tons of simple reference manuals for math everywhere on the internet, in most math papers, in most math books, everywhere! Yet still people fail to understand it. Many billions has been put trying to improve math education, trying to find shortcuts, trying to do anything at all. You are simply ignorant thinking that there are some quick fix super easy to implement things that would magically make people understand math. There isn't. It is possible that math education could get improved, but it wont be a simple thing.

JohnHaugeland 5y ago
> > Surely you must realize that you're protesting this because it has this reputation, though? > > I've never heard anyone make this accusation until I read it here on HN today. The reputation doesn't seem to be widespread. blinks really? It's kind of a famous thing. Teachers are taught how to cope with math phobia; other subjects (with the exception of dissection) generally do not create this effect. . > How to better teach math is like one of the most studied topics in education since it is so extremely Unsuccessful Many other disciplines are equally important and don't have the desperation for repair that math does It's so bad that it's gotten into popular music a dozen times; you can easily point to Tom Lehrer, Weird Al, even 2 Chainz for broaching the topic . > People learn programming faster since programming is simply easier Keep telling yourself that Remember who's cracking things like four coloring. . > There hasn't, way more effort has been put into making math easy and the math we have is the results of all that work. You seem not to be results focused. . > Nobody pushes back on writing simple reference manuals. The person I was responding to was. Three different people have with me in this thread alone. Notice that you've changed the topic to "reference manuals," which 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱 Ostensibly this is the part at which you launch into an explanation about how a simple cheat sheet that says things like " || usually means absolute value or magnitude" somehow isn't possible, even though it totally is Next you'll explain how simple summary symbols like that are somehow harder than Haskell, which was able to produce a cheat sheet just fine In reality, mathematicians just don't have the faintest clue how difficult other fields are, and are too busy patting themselves on the backs for their challenging intellects to realize that their work is under-used due to their inability to produce legends and keys . > Yet still people fail to understand it. You're not producing what's being requested, then you're surprised that what you're actually producing isn't working. . > trying to find shortcuts, trying to do anything at all. All that's being requested is a two page operator cheat sheet. If you'd stop wisely pontificating and just try it, you'd find it's really quite straightforward. I produced one for my students. It's just that my own education in mathematics only goes so far. 𝗜𝘁 𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁 You are doing the refusing you insist nobody's doing, right now . > You are simply ignorant thinking that there are some quick fix super easy to implement things Not really, no. I've succeeded at this. You are protesting against things that were not requested. Nobody asked for any "quick fixes." Nobody asked for any "magical make understand." These are things you said, not things I said. I said something very simple and very practical. Something that very much can be done. I want a two page PDF which puts operators next to their names, so the load on my memory is lower. Every time I ask that, some math fan goes on forever about how things I never asked for aren't possible, and ties that up with personal attacks. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗴𝘂𝘆𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Please keep the insults to yourself. Thanks. . > It is possible that math education could get improved Please stop trying to solve every problem. Nobody asked you to take on that Herculean task. What was actually requested was a simple two page PDF. That's a thing that a single person can do in an hour (well, maybe as a webpage, making an actual PDF is a hassle.) The constant attempt to change the topic to some greater thing blinds you to how easy fixing this actually is. The statisticians can do it: http://web.mit.edu/~csvoss/Public/usabo/stats_handout.pdf http://web.mit.edu/~csvoss/Public/usabo/stats_handout.pdf This isn't far off: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_mathematical_symbols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_mathematical_symbo... Seriously, nobody is saying "solve math education for all people." For `|x|` it would just say "absolute value, magnitude, length, or cardinality." It's a quick reference chart for people who already know the material but haven't actively used it for ten years, and to help know what to google for the rare cases where you don't. It doesn't teach anything. This shouldn't be a big deal, and people keep asking for it because it would *really* help