612 karma · joined June 18, 2016
If anyone in engineering has insight into this, I'd love to know.
Technically, non-fluid simulations could also be sped up using GPUs? Dynamics, solid state mechanics, thermal simulations, etc.
Let's just take an article from our own backyard: https://blog.ycombinator.com/ycs-essential-startup-advice/
Almost 800 points on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15331016
Quoting the article, "Growth is always a focus for startups, since a startup without growth is usually a failure." This is article doesn't apply to folks who want to stay small (the discussion of this topic ~ 3 people company).
You could have approached your argument a little less strongly - simply stating your opinions. Authoritative didactic statements require data to back it up otherwise it just sounds abrasive and completely unproductive.
I have yet another opinion - I’ve seen a wide variety of articles on HN from how to grow fast to how to stay small. We’re not going to stay productive by arguing without data.
You may not know what MagicLeap - the company - is, but you certainly don’t need to be told it’s a AR/VR headset.
I agree with obscure random crap that shows up on HN and takes forever to figure out what it is. This isn’t one of those cases. It’s utterly obvious.
Look at Apple’s full iPhone landing page. It’d be silly to explain at the top “iPhone is a wireless digital communication device.” It’s obvious that dude is wearing glasses that look like AR/VR headset. You ain’t gotta spell it out for people.
If I see this kind of resume land or my desk, it gets thrown out.
Of course you should be talking about yourself on your resume but a couple of this that are different here:
- Wtf is up with music - 51%/49% thing. - Publicly asking to be hired that reflects poorly on his current job at Google. - Excessively loud self marketing
why not have a simple site with your accomplishments? Why all the excess bullshit?
“If some listened they might have made some profit” - I think you’re giving yourself too much credit here.
It is not even good for beginners as so many things he does is completely and utterly wrong. People who do not have the expertise in their domain should not be teaching and perpetuating wrong methods and creating a generation of bad engineers/makers.
If you get a chance, please watch his YT series on KiCAD. Finally, he gets a PCB made and fumbles his way through.
Teachers are supposed to be domain experts that can lead students in the best-known-method path. This guy doesn't even come close.
If you want solid tutorials on Embedded Electronics, I recommend Patrick Hood Daniel's Newbiehack channel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMMamSVy1Zs&list=PLE72E4CFE7...
Not only does it skip the Arduino framework, he goes to a great length to explain fundamentals of embedded electronics. He is a fantastic teacher and above all, an expert at what he does.
Ever read a description or a brochure for an art show? An artists' biography?
It is full of infuriating bullshit.
It was so refreshing to read Francis Bacon's newly released Catalog Raisonne. All descriptions and biographical information is factual without any discussion of some pseudo-profound meaning. Same goes for good art critics such as David Sylvester[1]. He was one of the very few art critics that tried go past the pseudo-intellectual bullshit and truly understand Art and the Artist behind it.
I have read dozens if not hundreds of art catalogs, brochures and biographies. As an objective person, it is so difficult to get past the bullshit to actually understand and approach art.
I went to Georgia Tech and took the Renassaince Art course. About 98% was bullshit to the point I thought that it was some kind of a joke. I couldn't believe it.
Who puts seconds as an input for setting their morning alarm? MAD!
I wonder what Trump has to say about this move by Elon.
I LOVE HN's design.
Also, can you cite some examples of the list of products?
I can think of
- products with great UIs and awesome graphic design but horrible UX: Shopping cart checkouts that if you click something, you have to write the CC/Name-details again. Multi-city flight search on any major travel site is a pain in the ass.
Horrible user experience.
- Can't tell how long the clip/gif is
- Can't skip ahead
- Can't go fullscreen
- No sound
WTF.Color is relative. Got it. What else does it offer?
>> The book is not supposed to be about “scientific progress”. It’s supposed to be a pedagogical tool aimed at artists. If you want a technical explanation, you are looking at the wrong book.
I understand and I wish that was the case! However, the popularity of it and its fame as a text book (see Amazon reviews) combined with his claims of explaining how brain perceives color - indicates that it is used as THE color theory reference. I have a problem with that.
The problem is that "experiential" teaching without any scientific explanation is inadequate and misleading. Teaching part is where you explain the students - why. It is perhaps the approach in art colleges where rigorous science doesn't matter.
The problem stems when Josef Albers made scientific claims which go unquestioned as the factual basis for his cool color experiments. That is wrong and that's exactly the kind of nitpicking we need to do. What you call 'Pedantic nitpicking' is necessary and essential to the scientific process.
It is rather misleading to start the book with "The book does not begin with optics and physiology of visual perception, nor with any presentation of the physics of light and wavelength…. What counts here—first and last—is not so-called knowledge of so-called facts, but vision—seeing." and then go on to explaining his experiments using false claims (which again are highlighted and detailed in Alan Lee's criticism).
Anyhow, even if I am considering Josef's Interaction of Color from an artistic standpoint, he simply points out the cool illusions without any follow up on how to use/implement his concepts. I find it as a casual book that sits on the coffee table, not on my work desk.
However, Josef Albers went beyond his art to make false claims about color theory, how the human brain perceives color and made broad generalizations - based on anecdotal evidence and intuition. He went unchallenged for the most part. See the criticism linked in my original post.
I just checked the book "Color for the Sciences" that you had mentioned. I think I am going to purchase this one! Thanks.
[1] https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/12/the-story-of-... [2] http://depts.washington.edu/jrphys/ph214A07/albers.pdf [3] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/arts/design/josef-alberss...