kenzokai

I understand where instructors are coming from when they encourage just paying attention and not taking notes. That's because students often just copy down exactly what is being written on the blackboard verbatim without giving it much thought.

What enhances both information retention and understanding for myself personally is "active note-taking" - that is, not only writing down what the instructor is saying, but writing down my own thoughts along with it.

Horrible PayPal customer service. This person should not be allowed on their Twitter account.

Articles like this always skip the most crucial point.

Author talks about "outreach" and press coverage and such. But how is that done exactly? I realize this might be dependent on the app but there has to be some general principles one can follow.

If I were to launch an app in the app store today, almost NO ONE would know.

How do you get from that - to real influencers writing about your app?

I wouldn't say they are facts, I would say they are "sentences with a specific semantic structure that can be found on a highly trusted webpage".

And the most trusted web page happens to be that page.

That's a great argument about Tylenol, and if those answers have the possibility of being incorrect they should not be shown at all, since an algorithm will determine what is shown. A "sensitive information" classifier could point out "Ask your doctor, etc." on relevant questions.

But what about the consequence of not showing answers about creationism? My statistically average person decides my site sucks and moves to DuckDuckGo, and I've lost a source of revenue. Not good.

Floridi agrees that that is bullshit, but it's not Google's job to dictate what information we read.

Google's job is to give us the most relevant results, and as stated in the article, a large part of the US believes in creationism and thus it's relevant to them.

So statistically speaking, you are more likely to want to read that page for that search term.

Google is not a search engine for scientific facts, it is an advertising platform. Who should be the judge of what type of information is presented? You? How about we put it to a vote? That vote has happened, and these are the results.

Was it overly optimistic of me to assume it was a joke?

Fatal? How could either of those problems lead to death?

This is what makes startups so special, and powerful.

Everybody now knows (or should know) that the more modern type of developer environment - wear what you want, arrive when you want, stay home when you want, have all the free coffee you want - makes them MORE productive.

Pissing them off or giving them a shitty environment to work in makes them less productive.

And productivity = money.

Of course defects cost money. One defect means you lose money once.

Less productivity means you lose money every single day.

On the other hand, if legitimate use is allowed, there are doctors out there who will give you a prescription for faked symptoms.

I agree with the others.. why is your writing so hard to parse?

If you knew "a" girl, it doesn't necessarily mean she'd want to date you, or that you'd date her girlfriends (what if her friends were all guys?)

The idea is that you have a female to vouch for you, which is social proof.

While I see where you're coming from I think your analogy is flawed and it doesn't quite apply here.

As a martial artist and weight lifter that totally makes sense - practice, sparring, doing the actual activity is what will make you good. The more you do it, the more you train your subconscious to intuitively know what to do.

As an engineer and tutor it only applies in a limited way. I have taught people who want to learn programming but lack all sorts of fundamentals. What they need to do is just go back to basics - read a book - do the exercises. I find that as an adult learner missing the basic background on things just makes everything hard. You will need to ask questions every step of the way. Who will be on hand to answer those questions? People like me, who have sat down and studied the basics and learned from first principles, i.e. worked through the books.

Coding is like math. Both practice and theory are important. If you don't read the chapter first and try to jump right into the exercises, you will not be able to do them properly. If you read the chapter but do not do the exercises, then you will forget everything you've read.

I think "write code and see if it works" may be tad more succinct and closer to reality than "build models, reason about them, find properties, then prove them, then rely on them. Tests ... provide guarantees of correctness." wrt to OP's comment.

Like others have said, I find self-taught programmers (I'm a tutor, so I meet a lot of them) have an attitude of, "why should I care about time complexity?" They are motivated to get things done quickly, and will do it to the best of their ability, but it may not be the best solution, since that would require deeper theoretical knowledge.

On the other hand, programmers coming from academia are expected to "just know" a lot of the practical tools that are used these days. I did C++, Java, MATLAB, and machine learning-type stuff in school, but learned Git, Rails, Python, Hadoop, etc etc. after graduating. Recruiters, etc. expected I'd just be ready for that stuff right off the bat.

> that data and algorithms rule all

Well actually they don't because they overrode the algorithm instead of letting it do its job.

The culture at Uber is actually "greed".