learning

54 posts under this tag.

Today's Reading: Kon’nichi wa, Ruby 2
0
0
6
Apr
22

Unlike most people these days, I happened to chance upon Rails through Ruby, not the other way round. But wait, today’s reading is a tad geeky but I’m putting it up here for non-geeks to read it —particularly those, you know who you are, that don’t yet speak any computer language— so here’s some context: Rails is a tool (a web framework they call it) to make web-apps (that’s right, a meta-tool: a tool to make tools) and Ruby is the computer language in which Rails is written.

Anyway, I can’t remember how I found Ruby but I can tell you when I was certain it was something truly special: when I found Programming Ruby: The Pragmatic Programmer’s Guide and, shortly thereafter, Why’s (Poignant) Guide to Ruby. The first one is a most delightful, witty, unique manual of the language made out of of an acute bout of ruby-rapture and given away for free by its freakishly talented authors; the second is the exact same thing.

So, after much ado, here’s today’s reading: the first chapter of Why The Lucky Stiff’s poignant guide, Kon’nichi wa, Ruby . Technophobists worry not, this chapter doesn’t contain a line of computer code nor does it force you to install a thing, it’s just good ole prose. It is my Trojan horse to try to get you to learn Ruby (you gotta learn a computer language someday). In fact, I’m so confident in my wooden stallion that let’s do this: you only need to read the very first section (1. Opening This Book) of the chapter. If it doesn’t mesmerize you, if you don’t have the weirdest crooked grin on your face by it’s end, feel under no obligation to read any further.

Star
I'm going to marry you 2
0
0
6
Apr
20

The subject of the U.S.-Mexico migration (the biggest in the world, one hears) is everywhere right now. But unfortunately, almost all one always hears is pessimism, fear, nationalism, and prejudice. Most people don’t realize there’s something new and wonderful emerging. It’s a shame one doesn’t hear more often from Richard Rodriguez, a profoundly polemical Mexican-American writer. In his books, his essays, and his interviews he reinvents the concept of being Mexican. He lies about it, of course (he is the first to acknowledge it), but his is a fiction that describes me, his is a fiction I want to believe in.

You’ll have to excuse me but I’ve never felt as a victim of the US, I am American! I’ve been devouring the US all my life! But then again, that’s just weird old me—always suffering from multiple-nationality-disorder, from dislocation (I’m of the web! How could it be otherwise? “My kingdom is not of this world”); perpetually naive, perpetually “falling in love with cultures not my own”, perpetually imbued with the “arrogance” that “the individual is in control of the culture.”

I’ve compiled here a long list of quotations from several of Rodriguez’s interviews and articles. I tried to stick with the topic of migration but I did a lousy job at that, this man is too interesting.

Good News 2
0
0
6
Mar
31

To someone who dropped out of college and has argued along this lines to defend his decision, who has been playing with online reputation systems for a while now, this comment by Alex3917 —originally posted here in response to Paul Graham’s newest essay— was an epiphany, tying and explaining it all together:

So lately I have been thinking a lot about “qualified experts,” as mentioned in the article. Credentialism became prominent in the 20s because of advances in transportation technology. Before WWI everyone lived in the same town their whole lives, so anyone could vouch for you. Then after WWI there was increased mobility, so no longer could your neighbors provide the credibility needed to get a job or get startup funding. Thus college stepped up to fill the role of the middleman. This was essential to keep society functioning, although certainly credentialism hasn’t done much for the learning aspect of college.

Today, however, we have the Internet. Everyone is linked to everyone and anyone can vouch for you. I can email the management of any company and assuming I follow basic email etiquette I can usually get a response. As digital identity improves, everyone will be able to vouch for you based on the information you are supplying about yourself online. For example, PG has his essays and one of his books on his personal website. Surely this is as meaningful as a college degree.

Also, college credentialism is a hierarchy because you have one person making value judgements about many people. Anyone who knows anything about network theory knows that networks are more powerful than hierarchies, because Metcalfe’s law trumps Sarnoff’s law. Thus college supplied credentialism is much less effective than what we are capable of reaching if we use the Internet. This is why many of the “qualified experts” are so imcompetent, because hierarchies are so much weaker than networks.

Anyway, if someone wants to make a sh*tload of money I’d suggest developing some tools for the Internet that start to fill the credentialist role that colleges play currently. The value there will make the 2 billion Facebook is trying to get seem like peanuts. :-)

Btw, have I told you about Schank’s Law already? I think not. Here it is in all it’s glory:

Schank’s Law

Because people understand by finding in their memories the closest possible match to what they are hearing and use that match as the basis of comprehension, any new idea will be treated as a variant of something the listener has already thought of or heard. Agreement with a new idea means a listener has already had a similar thought and well appreciates that the speaker has recognized his idea. Disagreement means the opposite. Really new ideas are incomprehensible. The good news is that for some people, failure to comprehend is the beginning of understanding. For most, of course, it is the beginning of dismissal.

by Roger Schank, as it appeared in The World Question Center 2004

Star
Formists 2
0
0
6
Mar
12

  1. A patternist is someone with an unusual ability to discern, manipulate, and enjoy patterns.
  2. A form is a linguistic pattern.
  3. A formist is someone with an unusual ability to discern, manipulate, and enjoy forms.
  4. Formists are prone to strange and seemingly dumb language misunderstandings. A subtle error in form in a sentence can led a formist completely astray. This is often irritating to non-formists—who, as if they wore cognitive sunglasses that dull them to form, remain undazed by its glaring inconsistencies.
  5. It is also common for a formist to stop people in mid-sentence only to point out a particularly beautiful (or ugly) form they just noticed in their conversation or the surrounding language. Non-formists find this offensive and obnoxious. They shouldn’t—to continue the sunglass metaphor, where they see drab colors, formists enjoy vivid hues.
  6. Formists are good at spelling and care about it (even in spite of themselves). They just can’t help noticing it.
  7. Formists make formidable poets, programmers, writers (of all kinds), philosophers, mathematicians, linguists, and translators.
  8. Formists excel easily in school and in academia in general, both having a marked bias towards verbal talents.
  9. Formists learn new languages faster and better than non-formists—to the point that their enthusiasm and natural talent can be seriously annoying and off-putting to non-formists. Even Norbert Wiener, one of the greatest mathematicians of the twentieth century, was overwhelmed by his extremely formist father.
    Thus it was a familiar part of our life to hear foreign languages spoken in the household. My father, indeed, could speak some forty of them. He was so proficient in linguistic matters that his insistence as a teacher on accuracy and fluency had the somewhat surprising effect of almost completely inhibiting the efforts of my mother and of us children to speak more than one language.
    I Am a Mathematician, Norbert Wiener
  10. Formists have a natural bias against non-formists (and vice versa); they often think (mistakenly, of course) that theirs is the only kind of intelligence.
  11. Linguistic pedantry is an occupational hazard of being a formist.
  12. Eemadges is a website for and by formists. So is the lovingly kept Language Hat.
  13. Homo Sapiens is the formist ape.
  14. We live in the age of the triumph of form. In mathematics, physics, music, the arts, and the social sciences, human knowledge and its progress seem to have been reduced in startling and powerful ways to a matter of essential formal structures and their transformations. The magic of computers is the speedy manipulation of 1s and 0s. If they just get faster at it, we hear, they might replace us… Life in all its richness and complexity is said to be fundamentally explainable as combinations and recombinations of a finite genetic code. The axiomatic method rules, not only in mathematics but also in economics, linguistics, sometimes even music. The heroes of this age have been Gottlob Frege, David Hilbert, Werner Heisenberg, John Von Neumann, Alan Turing, Noam Chomsky, Norbert Wiener, Jacques Monod, Igor Stravinsky, Claude Levi-Strauss, Herbert Simon.

    [...]

    A college student enrolled in economics, once a branch of ethics, will now spend considerable time manipulating formulas. If she studies language, once firmly the province of humanists and philologists, she will learn formal algorithms. if she hopes to become a psychologist, she must become adept at constructing computational models. The manipulation of form is so powerful and useful that school is now often seen as largely a matter of learning how to do such manipulation.

    The Way We Think, Gilles Fauconnier, and Mark Turner (both emphases are mine)
  15. Much (arguably lame) humor is formist in nature. Puns are the quintessential formist joke.

    What did the Buddhist monk say to the hotdog vendor?

    “Make me one with everything.”

    * * *

    When the monk asked for his change, the vendor replied, “Change comes from within.”

    Formists just want to have fun.

  16. A formist compliment: “I’m warm for your form.”
  17. Formists enjoy proverbs, sayings, slogans, mottoes, aphorisms, and quotes in general. Have you noticed how trivial and pedestrian they sound when rephrased? Much of what we love in them is their form.
  18. Esperanto is the formist language—a mixed blessing.
  19. Math is the study of patterns through forms. And thus it was so disappointing to find so surprisingly few formists during the time I pursued a Math major.
  20. Algebra is the most formist of math theories.
  21. A classic formist comment: ”X is almost a lump of syntactic sugarWP .
  22. It takes a formist to enjoy Toki Pona.
  23. This list of figures of speech is a formist’s field day. So is this collection of aphorisms.
  24. All sitcom dialogues are formist but The Simpsons is specially remarkable. Here are two noteworthy compilations of Simpsonian formist candy: Beyond embiggens and cromulent and Subtly Simpsons.

    Carl [To the MENSA members]: Let’s make litter of the literati!

    Lenny: That was too clever! You’re one of them! [punches him]

    Episode: AABF18, They Saved Lisa’s Brain
  25. Touch, a language of making languages, is a formist wet dream.