>Beginners tend to start by saying they'll need a hadoop cluster and spend the next week setting up a pipeline.
Intermediate people tend to jump into R or scikit and try to model the problem with a small subset of data and the library and technique they know best. The advanced people tend to flesh out their hypothesis first and then work out the math and then jump to modelling with a small set of data and finally move to a cluster.
This is funny. It all boils down to metacognition, I suppose. Beginners don't know how much they don't know; they're seeing the tip of the iceberg but don't know the concept of an iceberg to begin with. It's just that white thing over there.
Intermediates see the tip of the iceberg and slightly panic while trying to correct course.
Advanced know they're in the polar circle because they know geography, they plot their course because they know navigation, and actively look-out for icebergs.
Here's what excites me.. The term "Emerging country" was used so much, that the real meaning of the concept of "Emergence" is practically unknown.
Here's the first paragraph from Wikipedia:
>In philosophy, systems theory, science, and art, emergence is a process whereby larger entities, patterns, and regularities arise through interactions among smaller or simpler entities that themselves do not exhibit such properties.
Something that's greater than the sum of things that constitute it, but it's still constituted by those very things.
My point is that often times, you'll find "resources" or tutorials that try to hide all the yak shaving that's necessary to get into a field (the constituents) and try to give you the "fruit". I'd much rather a course that says: here are the prerequisites for this course, here's what you need to know already, if you don't, go learn that and come back because you'll only waste your time. Listing exactly the things one needs to know would save time, in my opinion.