hc

10 ms·

31.
by hc 16y ago
i'm willing to let your remarks on carmack's "ego" slide, but only because you're such a paragon of humility yourself
32.
by hc 16y ago
I can tell you did a great job reading the article before you commented on it
33.
by hc 16y ago
she was saying that at that point she was not ripping out huge swaths of code and rewriting them, 'decimate' actually makes plenty of sense in this context
34.
by hc 16y ago
so fix it :P
35.
by hc 16y ago
penis mutilation isnt really the sort of 'hacking' i come to this site to read about
36.
by hc 16y ago
Up until the late 70's hardly anyone ever encountered a profoundly multi-function device before. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Greece
37.
by hc 16y ago
This is an outbox.
38.
by hc 17y ago
who cares?
39.
by hc 17y ago
it would make me more willing to expend the effort and time to investigate his theories on programming methodology.
40.
by hc 17y ago
sorry if this sounds overly combative, but is there any proof out there that this cockburn fellow actually can program his way out of a paper bag?
41.
by hc 17y ago
dude just say this: "i am a programmer and i write business apps, but i've also played with assembly and know what O-notation is. I also know a lot about computer networks, and i've modded my computer on multiple occasions (I used a solderi
42.
by hc 17y ago
MIT's does happen to be available on the internet...
43.
by hc 17y ago
> you're going to get a radically different K-complexity number than you will if your encoding goes the other way around. in the limit, all schemes are roughly equivalent. (they are equivalent up to constants.) > given the nature of
44.
by hc 17y ago
the answer is the simplest possible answer. this isn't obviously well defined, but it can be made so in at least one way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity
45.
by hc 17y ago
http://news.ycombinator.org/submitted?id=tihomir totally mystified as to why you're submitting this kooky garbage.
46.
by hc 17y ago
i'd say you nailed it here
47.
by hc 17y ago
see PEP 238, @ http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0238/
48.
"Area Of Brain That Makes A 'People Person' Discovered"(sciencedaily.com)
2 points by hc 17y ago|0 comments
49.
by hc 17y ago
No. i am a programmer. i think the hiring practice you describe is asinine.
50.
by hc 17y ago
i'm going to assume this post is one of those "irony"/"joke" thingamagigs that have been showing up recently according to some people
51.
by hc 17y ago
the timer starts from the time the contest opened (2 Sep 2009 23:00 UTC).
52.
by hc 17y ago
i'm not 100% convinced this author has any idea what an 'algorithm' is. Algorithms are simply one way of executing on insight, a way that is particularly well suited to large data sets, no doubt. huh
53.
by hc 17y ago
i'm pretty sure the correct way to do this is to identify (in linear time) all the words which correspond to substrings of the number(s), then use dynamic programming
54.
by hc 17y ago
or, you could man up and say something... isn't the one with his head up his ass precisely the one who needs more than "a hint"?
55.
by hc 17y ago
the products of a thing often supersede it. in this case, the development of inference is certainly a consequence of the development of the scientific method. but the validity of the latter is a mathematical consequence of the validity of t
56.
by hc 17y ago
i realized that i misread this original post. you are saying that what you do (study the brain) is more important than what some other scientists do (empirically study complex functions). i think this is kind of impolite for scientists to d
57.
by hc 17y ago
> your fist model will stink. you'll refine it and try again. and you'll keep doing that. unfotunatly, this mean your model ends up being dependent on all the data. this is exactly what the scientific community as a whole is always doin
58.
by hc 17y ago
when you train a computational model on half of your dataset and test it against the other half (which the author claims is Not Sufficiently Scientific), how is that qualitatively different from training it on all your data, and then "testi
59.
by hc 17y ago
> In relation to this article, it says that when you build a model that fits the data, it's not enough. It's a further requirement that the model makes testable predications that turn out to be correct. Models that make accurate predica
60.
by hc 17y ago
here is a course i have been working through that describes some learning algorithms: http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.867/lectures.html i also like this book: http://www.amazon.com/All-Statistics-Statistical-Inference-S...

More ›