3 ms·

I'm of two minds here. The pro is that the "you could have invented this" walkthrough from first principles is more engaging than "and then so and so introduced

I'm of two minds here. The pro is that the "you could have invented this" walkthrough from first principles is more engaging than "and then so and so introduced this term in 1972 and the definition is such and such". This style is a reaction to that boring and dry teaching style and tries to push towards what eg Feynman pointed at in the Brazil critique. The con is that you don't get to understand and see any of the history of the ideas or even the ballpark when it was discovered, you attribute it to the blog mentally and you don't know what is how new or old and can't reference it properly when talking to others.

detourdog 2mo ago
Disconnecting idea development from it's historic development is a disservice to the audience that may want to dig deeper.
- wpietri 2mo ago
  If only there were some sort of way for a reader to dig deeper on a topic without a writer having to spoon-feed them the entire history of everything! It's wild to me what people here expect out of something they got for free and that was offered as a gift.
  - detourdog 2mo ago
    Mentioning any idea disconnected from its roots may not provide the terms needed to search. Snarky replies always appreciated
    - wpietri 2mo ago
      Your theory is that anybody who writes anything is obligated to make sure you can find any related information with one Google search? Again, to me that looks like wanting to be spoon fed. I have no idea why you think the world owes you endless 101-level discourse, but I hope you recognize you're setting yourself up for equally endless disappointment. If you take a little responsibility for your own education, you'll be happier.
      - bonoboTP 2mo ago
        The overall message and impression of a text has to give the right picture regarding what's new, where the info comes from, etc. It's not about any kind of Google search. It's not about extra info. It's about intellectual honesty.
      - detourdog 2mo ago
        My theory is that anyone wishing to elucidate a complex technical concept is better served with contextual details. I think one method is superior to another. Anybody, anything, obligated, and any related information are hyperbolic terms I would have avoided. I understand with a weak position people often resort to hyperbole. I believe adding more terms to be googled is superior to fewer search terms. When working with ideas from first principles sharing the roots and development is superior to making no reference. I have no idea why you think the world owes me anything. I was describing what I prefer. I'm not sure why you think I'm not already endlessly disappointed by the state of the world and it's discourse. not having expectations always helps. I think that if you stop projecting ideals on strangers might help your mood.
        wpietri 2mo ago
        If you were trying to describe a preference, you didn't do a very good job. You stated it as a universal. But taking you at your word, if there are things that don't meet your personal tastes, maybe move on to the next thing to read? Not everything has to be for everybody. There are plenty of audiences where people are capable of digging deeper when they want it. Personally, I prefer writers who don't spell everything out. The kind of writing you favor I generally find tedious. I'd much rather read something that shows a little faith in the audience.
        detourdog 2mo ago
        I was replying to a comment that was undecided and outlined two choices. I described the reasoning of my preferences and even provided a caveat that my reasoning applied to a subset of the audience.
- mainmailman 2mo ago
  Have any examples of a blog post that meets your standard?
  - detourdog 2mo ago
    They are not blog posts but it is a presentation of technical development that meets my standard. james burke connections https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XetplHcM7aQ&pp=ygUXamFtZXMgYnVya2UgY29ubmVjdGlvbnM%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XetplHcM7aQ&pp=ygUXamFtZXMgY... Tim Hunkin Secret Life of Machines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlrbMHLBd4&list=PLtaR0lZhSyAPLuoSbMA29s3Ry8ZUvKff3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlrbMHLBd4&list=PLtaR0lZhSy... I have read plenty of blog posts that meet my standard. If I can think of one I will post it.
    - mainmailman 2mo ago
      Thanks for the recommendations!
Dylan16807 2mo ago
There's no reason a compelling walkthrough can't throw in historical citations, is there?
- Teever 2mo ago
  What specific historical citations would you like to see in this post? Perhaps you could contact the author with your suggestions?
  - Dylan16807 2mo ago
    I'm speaking in general terms and I have not studied much on this subject so I don't have specific suggestions for this post. Please refer to earlier posts in this comment chain for a general idea of what citations would be useful.
    - Teever 2mo ago
      What are your thoughts on the other comments in this chain that claim that the references and citations as they are in the linked post are acceptable? Why do you disagree with them?
      - Dylan16807 2mo ago
        First off: What is your goal here? My comment was one sentence and wasn't specific to this article. Why are you acting like I said things I never said? But okay I'll try to answer. > What are your thoughts on the other comments in this chain that claim that the references and citations as they are in the linked post are acceptable? > Why do you disagree with them? Which comments in particular are you talking about? And I mean, the post doesn't have "references and citations" plural that I can see. It has one clear reference. I see two comments defending that reference, and a whole bunch of comments saying that a post like this doesn't need references. I don't need to disagree with any of those comments. My point isn't about whether a post that lacks citations is "acceptable". I was talking about whether a post could add historical citations without losing momentum, so it could do a better job of fitting into context. A dozen notes sprinkled around about when/where different ideas came from, not just the mention at the very end of what decade arithmetic coding is from and the mention of the 2023 paper. I will say it's bad that the 2023 paper is described as "arguing that language modeling and compression are two views of the same thing", emphasis in the original. That very much makes it sound like a new idea when it isn't.

detourdog 2mo ago

Disconnecting idea development from it's historic development is a disservice to the audience that may want to dig deeper.

wpietri 2mo ago
If only there were some sort of way for a reader to dig deeper on a topic without a writer having to spoon-feed them the entire history of everything! It's wild to me what people here expect out of something they got for free and that was offered as a gift.
- detourdog 2mo ago
  Mentioning any idea disconnected from its roots may not provide the terms needed to search. Snarky replies always appreciated
  - wpietri 2mo ago
    Your theory is that anybody who writes anything is obligated to make sure you can find any related information with one Google search? Again, to me that looks like wanting to be spoon fed. I have no idea why you think the world owes you endless 101-level discourse, but I hope you recognize you're setting yourself up for equally endless disappointment. If you take a little responsibility for your own education, you'll be happier.
    - bonoboTP 2mo ago
      The overall message and impression of a text has to give the right picture regarding what's new, where the info comes from, etc. It's not about any kind of Google search. It's not about extra info. It's about intellectual honesty.
    - detourdog 2mo ago
      My theory is that anyone wishing to elucidate a complex technical concept is better served with contextual details. I think one method is superior to another. Anybody, anything, obligated, and any related information are hyperbolic terms I would have avoided. I understand with a weak position people often resort to hyperbole. I believe adding more terms to be googled is superior to fewer search terms. When working with ideas from first principles sharing the roots and development is superior to making no reference. I have no idea why you think the world owes me anything. I was describing what I prefer. I'm not sure why you think I'm not already endlessly disappointed by the state of the world and it's discourse. not having expectations always helps. I think that if you stop projecting ideals on strangers might help your mood.
      - wpietri 2mo ago
        If you were trying to describe a preference, you didn't do a very good job. You stated it as a universal. But taking you at your word, if there are things that don't meet your personal tastes, maybe move on to the next thing to read? Not everything has to be for everybody. There are plenty of audiences where people are capable of digging deeper when they want it. Personally, I prefer writers who don't spell everything out. The kind of writing you favor I generally find tedious. I'd much rather read something that shows a little faith in the audience.
        detourdog 2mo ago
        I was replying to a comment that was undecided and outlined two choices. I described the reasoning of my preferences and even provided a caveat that my reasoning applied to a subset of the audience.
mainmailman 2mo ago
Have any examples of a blog post that meets your standard?
- detourdog 2mo ago
  They are not blog posts but it is a presentation of technical development that meets my standard. james burke connections https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XetplHcM7aQ&pp=ygUXamFtZXMgYnVya2UgY29ubmVjdGlvbnM%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XetplHcM7aQ&pp=ygUXamFtZXMgY... Tim Hunkin Secret Life of Machines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlrbMHLBd4&list=PLtaR0lZhSyAPLuoSbMA29s3Ry8ZUvKff3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJlrbMHLBd4&list=PLtaR0lZhSy... I have read plenty of blog posts that meet my standard. If I can think of one I will post it.
  - mainmailman 2mo ago
    Thanks for the recommendations!

Dylan16807 2mo ago

There's no reason a compelling walkthrough can't throw in historical citations, is there?

Teever 2mo ago
What specific historical citations would you like to see in this post? Perhaps you could contact the author with your suggestions?
- Dylan16807 2mo ago
  I'm speaking in general terms and I have not studied much on this subject so I don't have specific suggestions for this post. Please refer to earlier posts in this comment chain for a general idea of what citations would be useful.
  - Teever 2mo ago
    What are your thoughts on the other comments in this chain that claim that the references and citations as they are in the linked post are acceptable? Why do you disagree with them?
    - Dylan16807 2mo ago
      First off: What is your goal here? My comment was one sentence and wasn't specific to this article. Why are you acting like I said things I never said? But okay I'll try to answer. > What are your thoughts on the other comments in this chain that claim that the references and citations as they are in the linked post are acceptable? > Why do you disagree with them? Which comments in particular are you talking about? And I mean, the post doesn't have "references and citations" plural that I can see. It has one clear reference. I see two comments defending that reference, and a whole bunch of comments saying that a post like this doesn't need references. I don't need to disagree with any of those comments. My point isn't about whether a post that lacks citations is "acceptable". I was talking about whether a post could add historical citations without losing momentum, so it could do a better job of fitting into context. A dozen notes sprinkled around about when/where different ideas came from, not just the mention at the very end of what decade arithmetic coding is from and the mention of the 2023 paper. I will say it's bad that the 2023 paper is described as "arguing that language modeling and compression are two views of the same thing", emphasis in the original. That very much makes it sound like a new idea when it isn't.