41 karma · joined January 25, 2021
3.1 is better than 1, so people think about it more than they think about 1, but less than they think about 5. This is how science _actually_ works.
A corporation would like to pay its employees as little as possible. The employees would like the opposite. What am I missing? - genuine question.
You could imagine a language that isn't OO but where you could define the . operator to dispatch certain functions with the same syntax as OO.
Two personal examples where Julia turns out to be much much faster than Python without me having to do anything but the most naive implementation:
- order of 10 float arrays with order of 1_000_000 elements each. Broadcasting an element-wise function in Julia or just doing a for-loop in Julia is way way faster than a pandas operation like col1 * col2 + col3 etc.
- the first time I tried one of Julia's optimizers (I think Optim.jl) it took 1ms on my problem. Sci-kit took 200ms. That's crazy.
100% this.
Why is it so difficult to copy files to/from my phone?
Why is it so difficult to list all the files in a folder?
Why is it so difficult to get a list of what's running?
_Why is it so difficult to know that my phone is working for me_?
When talking to Python colleagues about Julia one response is "well, but I don't really care about performance _that_ much".
The thing about Julia is that you can code without caring about performance (and the performance will be Python-like). If later on it turns out that you DO care, you CAN optimize it. With Python you don't have that option, as in Python "optimizing" means using cython/numba over numpy arrays, and all the limitations inherent to that approach.
This is obviously good, and I'm not even sure what the trade-off is. What am I losing?
You might have been radicalized...
According to Wikipedia, "paradox" can either mean "logically self-contradictory statement" or a "statement that runs contrary to one's expectation". I always thought that it meant the former only.
These two concepts should really really have separate words.
> The former is about correlations that appear in samples which are not representative of the general population, due to the way that those samples are selected.
You just said the same thing twice. Think about it.
For one you used terms like "subgroups" and "pooled data" and for the other "samples" and "general population". Those are the same things.
Then you used "[the effect] appears in" and in the other "correlations". Well, Simpsons paradox can also manifest itself in correlations. So you just said the same thing twice.
Yes.... exactly....
If you knew anything about chemistry past checking wikipedia, you'd just call it none.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_atmosphere
Hydrogen chloride 0.1–0.6 ppm
Hydrogen fluoride 0.001–0.005 ppm
You say you "analyzed" and "created financial models". But did you actually put money into it? And if so, did you make money?
Almost all "complex chemistry" that we know of involves hydrogen.
So to those people who say "but but but that's just life as we know it". No, it's also chemistry as we know it.
> Julia is dynamically typed, feels like a scripting language, and has good support for interactive use.
Literally on the front page.
Cue HN complaining how much "bureaucracy" and how much "red tape" the EU has, and smth smth socialism.
I live in the UK and while parent is obviously hyperbolic, it has some truth in it. Where I work, people with engineer in their job title are _literally_ the ones that come around when your computer breaks and they turn it off and on again.
Come to think about it, parent isn't even that hyperbolic...
A very large, say property developer, might hire GS for its fundraising needs, but a GS grad wouldn't want to work laying bricks. He might want to work as CFO or someone very close to the CFO, but those roles are much harder to get than working as grad for GS.
So it's not just about what the grad wants, it's also about what he can get.
This shouldn't be controversial. Anyone who's been in the industry knows that people move "up" from IB to their clients. Of course everyone wants that, but again such roles are harder to get than IB.
Probably there's more to it and I'm out of the loop :D