wawjgreen

18 ms·

31.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
to swyx: wow, i like the way you approach problems--and how you see things. Do you recommend any good books on critical thinking?
32.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
i have always said it: teachers don't know how to teach, students don't know how to learn, school admin don't know how to manage. Append a "most" for each (I love Ruby). The fundamental problem is one of teacher edu
33.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Considering how it were the Greeks that prevented Calculus from being discovered for 2000+ years, I would rather err on the side of Descartes and Leibnitz and still ask questions like these. I think you mistake my using the term "compu
34.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Yes, very very sure, but let me clarify. When I say "don't, I mean "should not", but if they do, hey, that is what pedantry is for isn't it? Exercise Q: Is doing theory for the sake of theory not ultimately about be
35.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
People don't do computer science for the mere theory of it. In the end, CS should yield utility--solve problems in the real world and those problems are solved through the medium of computers. There is a reason it is called COMPUTER sc
36.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
there is no guarantee that the information given to me is any better than the information I seek myself. The assumption problem holds in both cases, but the latter is better because there is no moral hazard (or conflict of interest).
37.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
the best if their skepticism is carefully done.
38.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
I don't think you can do astronomy without telescopes: they are the basic ingredient. :)
39.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
certainly an intriguing case, Dijkstra. I smell pedantry...but I could be wrong. A person so deeply involved in CS and not having a computer??? That's like saying being an expert cook but not wanting to taste food.
40.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
bring back del.icio.us!!!
41.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
<<but it comes with the assumption that the information found is reviewed critically by the searcher>> who brings this assumption?
42.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
wow Watson is very smart.
43.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
the first things skeptics should be skeptical about is skepticism itself: are they right in being skeptical about what they are skeptical about?
44.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
FS articles are deep in a shallow way, kinda like if Aristotle directed the "Avengers" (movie)... hehehe.
45.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Because you can use it usefully, it is objectively valuable; it derives its value from its utility--that is why it is CALLED money. :)
46.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
When I say "google search" I mean it in the Platonic, IDEA of THINGS type of way--generically speaking, that is. IOW, distrust is cured when you search information (by whatever means) and satisfy yourself. Sure beats a mere opinio
47.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
I have. I don't think it's garbage--it's just not good music PER my opinion. Now Hans Zimmer, that is good music.
48.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
You wrote: << If popularity and the word standard are in anyway connected then with Mozart's music it's no contest. Type 'Mozart' into YouTube and see how may hits you get.>> While not specifically SAYING: &q
49.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
That is exactly what I said and why i said that assertion was dubious; why should a scientist claim that EVERYBODY thinks Mozart is good music? Or pretend to imply that it is objectively good without for EVERYBODY?
50.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Everybody agrees that money is valuable; not everybody agrees that Mozart is good music. No?
51.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Thanks for your reply. But isn't this argument ad populum? While we are talking about music, it is about tastes that the real debate is. I think naive standardization is a problem. You don't need standards when it comes to tastes
52.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Whether someone can be trusted or not depends on you as well; everybody understands only as much as they know. (or sees what they understand). My assertions of flaws and dubiousity of the above three propositions are irrefutable, whether yo
53.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
per se, I don't mind the white spaces--but I don't want to be forced to use them. Like what you see in Julia, or Kotlin. Code is poetry. I should be trusted to organize my code according to how it reflects what it reflects. I disl
54.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
Thank you for your response. The Islamic Sufi tradition is simply an advanced level of traditional practice of Islam--a superbly intelligent interpretation that never deviates from the core principles; both Arabs and Persians have contribut
55.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
according to what standard? subjective taste do not a standard make.
56.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
the author of this blog is mentioned the mystic aspects of all major religions except Islam; was it done out of ignorance or intentional neglect? It's difficult to guess. But it surely does point out an important issue when an "ar
57.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
fully agree with you. the downvotes must be by Python fanboys seething in their indented whitespaces.
58.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
hehehe. what a bundle of hogwash. IQ test = flawed. effect of music on intelligence = dubious. Whether Mozart qualifies as good music = dubious.
59.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
the article merely said the obvious: thinking makes you tired--without providing any workable solutions. typical of the pedants and grant-whores.
60.
by wawjgreen 4y ago
the right word is "irrelevant".

More ›