inimino

11 ms·

121.
by inimino 3y ago
And the stronger this rejection, the stronger the pressure on anyone who represents a counterexample to the dogma to leave.
122.
by inimino 3y ago
Obviously, it depends on the work (why would we try to have a discussion like this without setting parameters?). But in general, I think the places that need 10x the code are outnumbered by the ones that would be better with 1/10th the
123.
by inimino 3y ago
Of course. The best of all is to let go of all dogmas about coding. But we will not get there by either blog posts or comments, it requires education over time.
124.
by inimino 3y ago
The point she is making is about choosing to go back, towards less abstraction, rather than forward. So I expect the answer to your question is that two endpoints are enough to establish both directions and make the intended point. If midpo
125.
by inimino 3y ago
Yes, it is.
126.
by inimino 3y ago
Every time it happens it gets harder for the next generation to read Shakespeare. Just because something has changed a lot is not an argument for changing it more.
127.
by inimino 3y ago
Your argument is that etymology doesn't matter, but you also make the etymological argument the other way? Well, ok, but we are not criticizing use of "comprise" but of "comprised of". This table setting grasps toge
128.
by inimino 3y ago
Yes it's a mistake exactly in the eyes of those who know the meaning of the word. "com" + "prise" = "grasp together". An error can be more common than the correct usage and still be an error. Would you acc
129.
by inimino 3y ago
"impose my preference on everyone else" By fixing a common mistake on a collaboratively edited encyclopedia? What are you even talking about? Do you have any idea what an editor does at the New York Times?
130.
by inimino 3y ago
Note that this is using the word "comprising" correctly, so is irrelevant to the topic of the incorrect usage.
131.
by inimino 3y ago
Yes, your exact thought process may be a black box to me, but I myself am a black box made to the same (DNA etc) spec. We have millions of ancestral years of experience trusting each other and we know how to simulate each other because we
132.
by inimino 3y ago
The point is that you trust those people. You can't trust a black-box model, but you can trust a result if the explanation that is provided actually explains it. That is, if the explanation has factors X, Y, and Z, then every time thos
133.
by inimino 3y ago
You forgot to subtract 32 first. Then you get 27. Or in this case, 54 happens to be evenly divisible by 9, so doing the exact conversion is relatively convenient (divide by nine, multiply by five).
134.
by inimino 4y ago
Your comment is amazing in its naivete. The first sentence in the post you are replying to already includes awareness of everything you said and more, while nothing in your comment suggests you understood the post at all. Priya doesn't
135.
by inimino 4y ago
That's a good talk. I'm paying attention. I think "scale is all you need" is wrong even when it's right. We have a responsibility to not allow the capabilities to outstrip our ability to understand and control. If w
136.
by inimino 4y ago
Then if you see yourself as a professional and if you have a strong character, you say it. If you're a real engineer, you and everyone knows this is part of the job, but if you're a SE, generally speaking you're going to meet
137.
by inimino 4y ago
Well yes, that's what we're talking about. I mean that the compiled artifact is equivalent, but of course you may have reason to care about the style of the code.
138.
by inimino 4y ago
Definitely worth a read for the humor value of the nonsensical code that can't work and the uncritical acceptance of it by the author as a "clever hack". All made possible by the human hallucinating what "ASCII emoji&quo
139.
by inimino 4y ago
The alternative before cloudflare existed was always DIY.
140.
by inimino 4y ago
It's CL, what are you gonna do...
141.
by inimino 4y ago
Physical things are obviously subject to physical laws. With software, things may be less clear. Sometimes they are not. The key part of engineering that's highlighted by such cases is that mathematical models are relevant. This is why
142.
by inimino 4y ago
There's something fascinating about the fact that an organization collectively made the decisions that lead to this outcome.
143.
by inimino 4y ago
The argument that a loss-leader or market takeover strategy should be resisted doesn't have to justify itself by claiming that an equally convenient alternative exists.
144.
by inimino 4y ago
Emergent, as in, "we cannot explain how this works," yes. That is nothing new in the field of ML or to anyone who has been paying attention.
145.
by inimino 4y ago
You can define engineering in many ways, and none of them is equally right in every possible context in which the term is used (so it has this in common with every other word). However, there are some ideas clustered around that seem to hav
146.
by inimino 4y ago
Possibly. Or not. It could be that the elegant expression can be written in less time by the expensive engineer, doesn't need to be rewritten in 6 months, and it may be that both of these people are getting paid the same anyway. So you
147.
by inimino 4y ago
Is that a serious question? Studying a field for years should make outcomes in that field less surprising, otherwise what have you been doing? The creators were surprised in the sense of "we got here sooner than expected" but not
148.
by inimino 4y ago
Or maybe that's just at the places you've worked.
149.
by inimino 4y ago
That is true of real engineering; unfortunately "software engineering" has been defined differently by some authors, with quite the opposite meaning.
150.
by inimino 4y ago
If you have full expectation and support from your superiors that you may shut down software development operations for ethical reasons based on your technical expertise, you might be a real engineer.

More ›