3 ms·

Thanks for all of those who helped or tried to help. I read the Wikipedia, Reddit, Youtube, articles and videos. I find that the Internet is full of misinforma

Thanks for all of those who helped or tried to help. I read the Wikipedia, Reddit, Youtube, articles and videos. I find that the Internet is full of misinformation, people with fake degrees and false experts, logical fallacies, bad grammar, poorly written articles that make no logical sense but are passed off as authoritive. I mean I did research before I came here to ask my questions because nothing on the Internet made any logical sense to me, and I failed to understand it. Each one of you has a different explanation, and some of you instead of explaining it keep linking to Wikipedia articles I already read several times and have posted they don't make any sense to me and I don't understand them, continuing to link to them won't help me, explaining them in simpler terms will. I asked Hacker News, because you are supposed to be experts here who can explain anything in simple terms and help people out. I see now that I made a big mistake in that, and I feel like I am being trolled here and been given links to joke sites and misinformation and Wikipedia Word Salads posing as academic journals. I mean I appreciate the efforts, but now I am even more confused than when I first asked my questions. This is why Computer science isn't that popular anymore, and why more people are not studying it as much.

xwowsersx 14y ago
I agree that it can sometimes be frustrating to find the right information online, but your absurd pronouncements, e.g. "This is why Computer science isn't that popular anymore, and why more people are not studying it as much." serves only to marginalize you and discourage people from trying to help you out. Again, I understand your frustration, but please consider that certain topics, especially in math and cs, cannot be readily understood without a bit of preparation and that you might just not be grasping what you read because you aren't quite ready. The first answer on this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5667089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5667089 was pretty helpful, what didn't you get about it? To summarize the answer: there are certain problems which are easy to solve and certain problems are seemingly hard to solve but we know are easy to check (if we've arrived at the right solution). P = NP is simply the question, "are the class of problems in NP (the hard ones) actually just as easily solved as the set of P problems or can we prove definitely that there is no efficient algorithm to solve the NP problems?"
lucozade 14y ago
Writing an article on a complex mathematical subject that is sufficiently rigorous, with citations and references, but also sufficiently simple for a layman to understand is hard. In fact, one might even suggest that you may need a very large number of attempts at articles until you find one that meets your exacting needs. On the plus side, however, I'm sure when you see such an article you'll know straight away that it's the article for you being neither hot nor cold, as it were. Interestingly, your apparent frustration at not seeing such an article in the (relatively) few that you have read would lead me to suspect that you think that it is quite easy to write such an article. Maybe even as easy as it would be for you to be sure you have found it? Who knows? Maybe that assertion is correct. Fortunately, it has been noticed that there are a number of similar types of problems i.e. that appear hard to perform but easy to verify. There is also a great deal of interest in the mathematical and computing communities in knowing whether, what many of us consider are hard, are in fact, easy. I would attach a link but I have a feeling you've already seen it. BTW on the subject of logical fallacies, may I suggest that dismissing all the articles on Wikipedia because of one article in an English daily newspaper, even though it may well have been correct, is a tad rash? There are definitely fallacies and inaccuracies in Wikipedia but there are in English newspapers too. Often remarkably similar fallacies and inaccuracies but I digress.
- orionblastar 14y ago
  Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by universities. http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation/2305 http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-dis... http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm In fact, Wikipedia had a scandal recently. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-w... Not only that but they get some facts wrong and refuse to correct them: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-... I don't really see why Wikipedia is considered a valid source of anything in academia or learning things. I don't think it is 'easy' to write an article, in fact I know it is hard and difficult without making mistakes and having logical fallacies bad grammar and other things. I was a computer programmer and became sick and disabled and took up writing. I don't have the money to continue my college, so I have to rely on what is on the Internet. But I often find what is on the Internet is either, wrong, has errors, uses logical fallacies, is inaccurate, make nonsense, or leaves things out. I am starting to find that books are better and more accurate and easier to understand and read than your typical collection of articles at Wikipedia, or posts on Reddit or anywhere else for that matter. The best responses I got on this thread is to read some books that the various computer science courses offer, that is the best advice I can get. Instead of links to stuff I already read or watched and got confused by. I understand the downvotes, I don't understand something, and since I am questioning one of the main parts of computer science I am seen as a threat and in order to discourage me from asking more questions and drive me from HN, my comments will be downvoted by dupe accounts until I am no longer asking questions or participating here. I think I have valid questions, valid criticisms, and I am being honest in that I am confused and don't understand it. I am not pretending to be an expert on the subject and faking stuff, I am trying to learn but it is very difficult.
DanBC 14y ago
Could you quote bits of answers and say what it is that you don't understand about them? Don't forget that some of the conflicts are going to come about because people are simplifying substantially. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/explainer-pnp.html http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/explainer-pnp.html

xwowsersx 14y ago

I agree that it can sometimes be frustrating to find the right information online, but your absurd pronouncements, e.g. "This is why Computer science isn't that popular anymore, and why more people are not studying it as much." serves only to marginalize you and discourage people from trying to help you out. Again, I understand your frustration, but please consider that certain topics, especially in math and cs, cannot be readily understood without a bit of preparation and that you might just not be grasping what you read because you aren't quite ready. The first answer on this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5667089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5667089 was pretty helpful, what didn't you get about it? To summarize the answer: there are certain problems which are easy to solve and certain problems are seemingly hard to solve but we know are easy to check (if we've arrived at the right solution). P = NP is simply the question, "are the class of problems in NP (the hard ones) actually just as easily solved as the set of P problems or can we prove definitely that there is no efficient algorithm to solve the NP problems?"

lucozade 14y ago

Writing an article on a complex mathematical subject that is sufficiently rigorous, with citations and references, but also sufficiently simple for a layman to understand is hard. In fact, one might even suggest that you may need a very large number of attempts at articles until you find one that meets your exacting needs. On the plus side, however, I'm sure when you see such an article you'll know straight away that it's the article for you being neither hot nor cold, as it were. Interestingly, your apparent frustration at not seeing such an article in the (relatively) few that you have read would lead me to suspect that you think that it is quite easy to write such an article. Maybe even as easy as it would be for you to be sure you have found it? Who knows? Maybe that assertion is correct. Fortunately, it has been noticed that there are a number of similar types of problems i.e. that appear hard to perform but easy to verify. There is also a great deal of interest in the mathematical and computing communities in knowing whether, what many of us consider are hard, are in fact, easy. I would attach a link but I have a feeling you've already seen it. BTW on the subject of logical fallacies, may I suggest that dismissing all the articles on Wikipedia because of one article in an English daily newspaper, even though it may well have been correct, is a tad rash? There are definitely fallacies and inaccuracies in Wikipedia but there are in English newspapers too. Often remarkably similar fallacies and inaccuracies but I digress.

orionblastar 14y ago
Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by universities. http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://library.williams.edu/citing/wikipedia.php http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-discourages-academic-use-of-his-creation/2305 http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/wikipedia-founder-dis... http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://theminaretonline.com/2007/04/19/article1475 http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/paperref.htm In fact, Wikipedia had a scandal recently. http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-w... Not only that but they get some facts wrong and refuse to correct them: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-wikipedia.html http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/09/an-open-... I don't really see why Wikipedia is considered a valid source of anything in academia or learning things. I don't think it is 'easy' to write an article, in fact I know it is hard and difficult without making mistakes and having logical fallacies bad grammar and other things. I was a computer programmer and became sick and disabled and took up writing. I don't have the money to continue my college, so I have to rely on what is on the Internet. But I often find what is on the Internet is either, wrong, has errors, uses logical fallacies, is inaccurate, make nonsense, or leaves things out. I am starting to find that books are better and more accurate and easier to understand and read than your typical collection of articles at Wikipedia, or posts on Reddit or anywhere else for that matter. The best responses I got on this thread is to read some books that the various computer science courses offer, that is the best advice I can get. Instead of links to stuff I already read or watched and got confused by. I understand the downvotes, I don't understand something, and since I am questioning one of the main parts of computer science I am seen as a threat and in order to discourage me from asking more questions and drive me from HN, my comments will be downvoted by dupe accounts until I am no longer asking questions or participating here. I think I have valid questions, valid criticisms, and I am being honest in that I am confused and don't understand it. I am not pretending to be an expert on the subject and faking stuff, I am trying to learn but it is very difficult.

DanBC 14y ago

Could you quote bits of answers and say what it is that you don't understand about them? Don't forget that some of the conflicts are going to come about because people are simplifying substantially. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/explainer-pnp.html http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/explainer-pnp.html