4 ms·
"Data" Sucks
- brudgers 2y agoIn ye olden days, the computer science term for data was often "table." [1] The problem with "data" is it is the wrong abstraction layer for thinking about computation because structure is what separates data from random values -- there ain't no such thing as random data. If it's random it's not data. If it's data it's not random. [1] I learned this reading Micheal Jackson...no not that one.
- taeric 2y agoOr code, if you were a lisper. :D Data is a rather generic term that fits just fine in many contexts taking on different ideas.
- drcongo 2y agoThe beer hunter? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson_%28writer%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson_%28writer%29
- brudgers 2y ago“No not that one”
- Rucadi 2y agobuffer is also a candidate :)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ssivark 2y agoThis is basically the debate between Alan Kay and Rich Hickey... on HN, almost a decade ago :-) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11945722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11945722 The key idea is (bare) data -vs- objects (which encapsulate data and let you interpret/interact with it).
- IAmBroom 2y agoNo, the key idea is meaningful names versus calling things "x", and defining "x" in the documentation to be "a variable".
- Chinjut 2y agoReading the post, it seems like what sucks is variables without readily accessible types.