For the rest of us, what classes are these? Part of the reason an easier class is better for the public is because there's just less time for working people. If the difficulty/time commitment for the offered classes next semester are substantially more than 229a I'd imagine you'll see a much higher dropout rate not due to lack of ability but due to lack of time. It seems odd Stanford would try to pack a "real" course into the online/public format, but at the same time seems odd they'd dilute a "real" course for their undergraduates.
this i guess is not to ease for lazy slobs (what you described :) but to ease the demand for help on the staff.
The critic is that they overdid
There's no reason a class can't have the same material presented two (or three or twelve) different ways for multiple audiences.
There's no reason a class needs a "start date" and an "end date." We can grow classes to be about communities, not authorities. None of us are as smart as all of us.
We shouldn't copy the Boring Ole' Lecture Format (and especially not "camera up my nose while I write on paper") when we could be doing so much more.
- Scale traditional educational techniques (lectures, homeworks, schedule) to a class size of 100,000 people
- Come up with an altogether new way to teach and assess students by taking advantage of the web
It's probably a good idea to figure out the bugs in solving the first problem before tackling the second.
So - people still learn together, just not necessarily concurrently.
I think this course would be great for what it does if they made the programming projects a bit harder and maybe labeled it an intro level course (CS129?). I totally agree with the posters sentiments -- I'd much rather have a harder class where you interact with other students to learn more complex material.
- Applying known ML algorithms to a real world task
- Coming up with new ML algorithms and research
It turns out (ahem) that the first goal, applying ML, is not only much, much higher in demand than the second goal, but is also much, much easier to teach than the content required to pursue the second. This dichotomy is the reason the split between CS229a and CS229 in both content and audience works so well. The demand for CS229 is low and the rigor is high (so it should be priced high), and the demand for CS229a is high and the rigor is low (so it should be priced low.) The author signed up for the wrong class. I think Stanford is teasing out subfields of CS that have this quality, and there sure are many.