Re:Extending Van Gogh’s Starry Night with Inpainting
by JetSpiegel on Wednesday December 03, 2014 @05:27PM
(#8696737)
Particularly in more advanced applications of the Wolfram System, it may sometimes seem worthwhile to try to analyze internal algorithms in order to predict which way of doing a given computation will be the most efficient. And there are indeed occasionally major improvements that you will be able to make in specific computations as a result of such analyses.
But most often the analyses will not be worthwhile. For the internals of the Wolfram System are quite complicated, and even given a basic description of the algorithm used for a particular purpose, it is usually extremely difficult to reach a reliable conclusion about how the detailed implementation of this algorithm will actually behave in particular circumstances.
Trust us, we're professionals!
Re:Extending Van Gogh’s Starry Night with Inpainting
by jordigh on Wednesday December 03, 2014 @06:49PM
(#8697088)
Yeah, I find this article very insulting and condescending. "Don't worry your pretty little head, our ideas are far too complicated for you to understand!"
Re:Extending Van Gogh’s Starry Night with Inpainting
by JacobEdelman on Wednesday December 03, 2014 @06:01PM
(#8696925)
Its a They, not He. The post isn't written by Wolfram himself :)
Re:Extending Van Gogh’s Starry Night with Inpainting
by geofft on Wednesday December 03, 2014 @06:44PM
(#8697075)
The Principle of Computational Equivalence says that Wolfram and his employees are equivalent, right?
http://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/WhyYouDoNotUs...