JimmyM
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
> VBA AROUND(20) VB6 | vba -vb6
would work?
It often gets overlooked because we all understandably want to hype something in a language that's really cool, original, abstract or otherwise reflects well on us. But being able to intuitively, iteratively and rapidly work on XML & HTML files is lush, and the IDE with built-in REPL is just gravy for this purpose.
Even if working on XML and HTML files is boring and a technically solved problem in most languages, it feels better in Racket to me, and the essay did explain why it feels better.
I think you're accidentally overstating the strength of their case, probably just the clause-level equivalent of a typo.
They actually said:
> some of whose staff have links to organisations sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood.
So, just to be clear, they're excluding anything with (interpreting the vague language generously) <=3 degrees of separation from the Muslim Brotherhood (organisation -> staff member -> an organisation -> Muslim Brotherhood) as a reliable source.
Totally unscientific, but to put this in a kind of very loose and silly context, Facebook claims that its users are on average connected to every other user by 3.57 degrees of separation. I suspect that the figure for this kind of connection is actually, relatively, much higher, but I sincerely doubt it's all that much higher than 4 (i.e. enough to make this sort of connection relevant) - especially when you think that these aren't even friendship relationships, but something so much weaker!
edit: the link to Facebook's claim - https://research.fb.com/three-and-a-half-degrees-of-separati... and some typos and omissions of my own
I was/am expecting Haskell to be broadly similar to ML - what's the main way the two languages differ?
edit: never mind, from the reddit discussion you linked:
> while these languages are undoubtedly strongly typed, they are not referentially transparent by default, and actually embrace some levels of imperative programming.
Good read, thanks!
Especially for cases like that - if someone has more 'sway' on Wikipedia than you, they can (and will often) just say something like "Thanks for the source - I'll verify and if it says what you think it says, I'll add it in to the article." Then do nothing, ever again. In fact, unreliable citations, or citations that don't actually say what the citer thinks they say, that can be easily checked online are far more acceptable on Wikipedia than citing a book.
Inertia like this leaves useless pages like "Oplomachi" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oplomachi) live way after they should have been merged, as well as leading to the deletion of useful pages/sections/references.
The major articles, which are more likely to get attention, tend to be less dysfunctional than niche interests. That said, there are of course far more articles relating to niche interests than there are major articles.
Following Bartosz Goralewicz's post about how well botting works to manipulate Google in...2014 I think? there's a small black hat industry that's sprung up around imitating this kind of user reaction, and it does reportedly work to remove pages from Google. I've had my suspicions that it's been used against sites I've worked on a few times (2 or 3).
TL:DR; Quora should generally not be ranking so well (but Google's complex enough to be unpredictable on a page-by-page basis these days).
I never said it was a particularly clever review. Although it did seem heartfelt.
> The sublime moments come when Donen calms down and concentrates on melody.
That's a pretty glowing quote!
Overall, the review gives two stars - bad, but not exactly a hatchet job. The criticisms are fair, and well-justified - and Syd Barrett is a pretty cool point of comparison. If anything, I would say it suggests that the hatchet job really is dead if this is the worst that can be found - it's negative, but it really works to justify its negativity and struggles throughout to pick out bright spots.
A hatchet job, in my opinion, must be unremittingly & deliberately brutal, or slash quickly and leave the target all-but-beheaded. Coldplay saw many examples of the former, as reviewers struggled to explain why mediocrity in sufficient quantity became something somehow worse, while I think it was Terrorizer magazine (maybe Metal Hammer?) who managed a one-word review of Fall Out Boy.
Is YAML one of those things that proper professional programmers need but us amateurs can botch our way around?
If you just want to do indie game dev, it's great, but it doesn't transfer and it teaches bad habits without the basis you mention in bits & bytes, data structures & algorithms.
While programming in general is highly abstract & often requires you to form a roughly analogous model of the situation in your head, game-dev programming usually involves you working directly on that model. It's very physical. Move this to that location, shrink those, animate the other, fade that out of existence. It's much easier to see the effect of your code in a game engine than through programming a sorting algorithm and logging the results to console.
For that reason, it's a great way to see if programming might be something you enjoy. It's not a great way to learn programming.
edit: apologies, I didn't see xyzzy_plugh's comment before making my own.
On FB, that's the remarketing side, and it's a lot more manual. Generally the goals and data will be selected by the advertiser themselves. It works, but it's a bit blunt-weapon-y - let's say it'll catch 10% of people who are absolutely going to convert, and 90% of people who are absolutely uninterested for campaign X. All percentages here are pulled from nowhere, they're just to give you a general idea.
Remarketing is popular because conversions. Also, if you're well-off or otherwise a desirable target, you cost more to reach through Facebook - so you're likely to see more remarketing campaigns, because automatic campaigns will adjust to target less expensive individuals until they've gone through all of them.
Facebook's automatic targeting is a lot more sophisticated, and much more in line with the suggestion engine idea. Let's say it will catch 0.2% of people who are absolutely going to convert, 9.8% of people who might possibly convert, 45% of people who vaguely appreciate the ad being there without converting (including people who might Like/Share/comment on the post), and 45% of people for whom the ad doesn't really connect. It's not usually quite as powerful for conversion, but on average it's pretty accurate at guessing if you'll be interested.
Also, StumbleUpon was a decent suggestion engine once upon a time - if they could actually design a proper extension that did something similar, I'm sure it would be a success.