The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Perusing articles, I came across Prime Number Distribution Sequence, first posted back in 2015. It currently has a score of 1.0 from 10 voters, even though the article seems well laid out, and a quick glance indicates it may contain a bit of interesting info, even if some points are invalid.
Is it really worth a score of 1.0, or is this a sign of SO-type action? Based on the biggest comment against it being a disagreement with why 2 is considered to be a prime number (although the article does treat 2 as prime, even if for the wrong reason), wouldn't a score of 2 or 3 make more sense? The article seems to have at least some meat on it for mental pondering.
I have seen articles that were complete crap that were treated better than this. It appears the author has closed their account in response to their treatment. (Although how this was updated today with what is now an inactive account is another perplexion.) This is not the only example I've seen of accounts closed because of responses the author received.
Can anyone see a reason not to vote the article a 5, to give a little offset to the score? Or am I missing something?
I realised, afterwards, that it was very tenuous....
It's the "O'" you see. As in, "Gaunter O'Dimm". The scariest antagonist in any video game I played in a long while.
It's from the Witcher 3 DLC, Hearts of Stone.
Rating systems tend to go that way. When anybody can rate something, it appears to end up in a binary mode: Perfect rating or nothing, often enough with immediate consequences for anything less than a perfect score.
I think that this sort of behavior is a sign that there is some sort of competition between users is going on. The rating system has become a 'weapon' in the competition, a means to promote 'friends' and harm 'oppnents'. The problem is, that this behavior makes the ratings worthless for anybody who is interested in the subject, not in the competition between the users.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
The voting system has the problem of going that way, because of anonymity... the probably worst part of the online life we have here...
I do not think I would vote more than 3 (possibly 2 or nothing) as the article has elementary errors (in some places it seems author try to build a private version of the numeral word)... However if you feel it worth a 5 - vote it...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
(Although how this was updated today with what is now an inactive account is another perplexion.)
Because it was edited by CP-Staff.
David O'Neil wrote:
It appears the author has closed their account in response to their treatment
After reading the message board... I think that most of the messages were respectful enough and the answers of the author were actually kind of arrogant and more "out of scope" than the messages he was answering.
A question: Do you think that Chris Mill deserved to be reported as he claims?
David O'Neil wrote:
Can anyone see a reason not to vote the article a 5, to give a little offset to the score?
If you think it deserves it, vote it
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
It starts with the rather pompous "and it also provides the first-ever analytical representation of prime numbers"
And goes on with: "our primes are 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9." I think people may be annoyed by things like that. [EDIT:] I realise that he means "our assumed primes in this case" but he is stretching the terminology beyond what I would think is academically acceptable, whilst the tone of the "paper" is trying to be academic (IMHO with not much success).
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
Mathematician wars. Mathematician are even more aggressive than programmers. Well, at least, in the Internet.
There is another math/programming article in the Codeproject, where some theoretical disagreement caused mutual threats and attempt to find where the article author lives.
I originally voted 5 to counteract what appeared to be malicious votes.
Then I read the article. Then I read the messages. Then I removed my vote.
I won't have any part in encouraging anything from someone as arrogant as that author. Besides that, I can't recall the last time I saw an article as useless as that. It serves absolutely no purpose to anyone doing real-world programming. (Let's find prime numbers and we'll use floating point math to do it... right.) Possibly for academics but that is debatable. I don't think academics would accept "proofs" based on invalid assumptions. "Let's assume three is not a prime number ..."
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant Anonymous - The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine Winston Churchill, 1944 - Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. Mark Twain
I am really keen to try VS2019.... (particularly WPF with .NET Core)
But, I really don't want to face the "you have to uninstall everything manually, it will only takes 753,567 hours of hard work, googling, registry hacking" problem....
They stress that it can work side by side with VS2017, i.e. they want to make it easy to use without impacting your system negatively..., but it's not very obvious if they intend the final release to be an easy update to the preview builds, or not.
Anyone has any idea on that?
Come to think of it, I'd like to try that at home and I might have HyperV installed on my home machine.. should check that out, I guess...
[EDIT | CLARIFICATION]
I am wondering if the update
from VS2019 preview 2 -> to VS2019 final release is gong to be problematic. Or not.
It's all about VS2019 itself.. not what I use it for...
And I asked because last time I tried.. (granted that might have been VS 8 or 11?), I had plenty of garbage preview framework left over and I was in installation / DLL hell for a while...
Also had problem with .NET Core 2 preview... There was some (preview) left over dependency I couldn't remove when upgrading to final release of .NET Core 2.0