Papers We Love
paperswelove.org
paperswelove.org
I left so excited by both conferences and started on pulling on threads around type systems and eventually started a podcast as a result.
The podcast changed over the years, but originally it was just a way for me to investigate things I had heard of at Paper We Love and Strange Loop. As a community, PWL is a nice on-ramp into CS Theory. Thank you Zeeshan Lakhani.
Thank you for doing what you do.
1. The unfortunately defunct blog "The Morning Paper" that provides a short write-up/explainer of each paper. https://blog.acolyer.org
2. Will Larson's favorite CS papers. https://lethain.com/some-of-my-favorite-technical-papers/
Some chapters (Seattle, Chattanooga, Bangalore) have managed to keep up a semi-regular cadence of Zoom meetups. NYC tried but has a hard time getting speakers (which is a bit surprising tbh.)
If you're interested in running a meetup, being a speaker or volunteering your time hit up @papers_we_love on Twitter.
https://www.allthingsdistributed.com/files/amazon-dynamo-sos...
Fundamental Concepts In Programming by Christopher Strachey is awesome. It’s a lot less technical because it was based on a series of lecture notes. Christopher Strachey is also an inspiring figure in CS to me as someone who was a perpetual fuck up and a late bloomer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Strachey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Concepts_in_Progra...
If you find there is just too much unfamiliar technical language, it’s a good idea to pause and look up a definition. You might need to follow that chain several steps, but that will help you get to an understanding of new terms.
Only read the introduction.
The first reading is to inventory the words, where they are used, and how important they are. Don't try to understand except in the most vague of ways.
The second time you can start to make some sense out of it because hopefully you think you might understand 1/3- 1/2 of the words.
Now look up some definitions. Google might help, otherwise the difficult word(s) might be cited, in which case you need to read the abstract of the relevant paper (only enough to get a definition of what the word might mean).
The third time you read it, you should know 1/2 to 2/3rds of the words and be able to make good connections between them, you start to see the ideas take shape.
The fourth read you fill in the gaps from the outline you made in the third read.
If the paper is well written, the introduction lays out the relevant current thought on the topic, and suggests a way by which some conflict in this thought can be resolved.
The discussion presents that resolution.
Murat Demirbas a prof at SUNY Buffalo has described his method - http://muratbuffalo.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-i-read-research...
Does the attendees pay for this and is it enough to cover the cost or is it profitable?
How is meeting people who are not authors of the paper more useful than organizing online?
Plenty of pizza and beer, too :)
Warmly recommended.
São Paulo has so many universities and computer science groups.
Maybe you could get some people together and start one https://github.com/papers-we-love/organizers