|
Wordle 874 6/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜🟩
⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩
⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩
⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩
⬜🟨🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Borman led the Apollo 8 mission which was the first manned mission to orbit the moon.
He was 95!
Americans might remember him mostly from his television commercials for Eastern Airlines.
Frank Borman[^]
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas – and God bless all of you, all of you on the good Earth
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
#Worldle #656 2/6 (100%)
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜↖️
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🎉
https://worldle.teuteuf.fr
had to use map
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't mean you need to teach it in high school. Not that I'm saying you shouldn't. Overall I think schools should teach people things about statistics (like the need to normalize deaths to know if being unvaccinated makes you unsafe), and evidence in general (that statistics beat anecdotes)
|
|
|
|
|
Akin to trying to understand Shakespeare's works without knowing English grammar.
Edit: Just saw that this article is 9 years old. Any policy changes, or changes of opinion since then?
modified 9-Nov-23 6:52am.
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: Akin to trying to understand Shakespeare's works
Not at all.
First of course and most important, Shakespeare's works are written in Old English. Which is difficult to understand even for someone that does understand modern english.
And of course one doesn't need to be able to parse an english statement to communicate in english.
There is also additional contextual information in Shakespeare that one needs to understand which has nothing to do with grammar. Certainly someone who wants to become a university professor specializing in Shakespeare is going to need knowledge in general history, history of the theater and history of that era.
Not mention they better know who Bacon is. And that of course has nothing to do with grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
Am not familiar with any other English author than Shakespeare.
Just meant that a knowledge of grammar - verb, noun, adjective, subject, object, preposition, etc. is needed for proper understanding of some long sentences or simple poems. I regularly read long sentences in Sanskrit, Kannada, Tamil, where there is a prescribed method of comprehending a sentence, based on grammar. Without which the sentence can sometimes mean exactly the opposite.
In data science also, without proper understanding of calculus principles, methods like gradient descent will only be partially understood. Optimization methods are predominantly calculus based.
modified 10-Nov-23 7:39am.
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: In data science also, without proper understanding of calculus principles
Yes.
Unfortunately there is a large disconnect between what the OP author posted (verbiage) and the link that they added as a reference.
So as to the verbiage and only that your statement is very valid.
For the link it says nothing at all about Data Science but it does comment on the need for Calculus (or not.)
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: the sentence can sometimes mean exactly the opposite.
You don't say.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: First of course and most important, Shakespeare's works are written in Old English.
As an aside, and it kind of illustrates how everything evolves, including science and mathematics, Shakespeare isn't really written in particularly old English. Elizabethan English, yes, but if you read some Chaucer, which is written in older (middle) English than Shakespeare, suddenly old Will's (modern English, in reality) works look a lot more modern and accessible, and you can get a real taste of old English by reading, say, the poem "Beowulf", which looks at first sight not entirely unlike German but with some unfamiliar characters, the most obvious being the thorn which is pronounced "th" and gave rise to the use of "Ye" as in "Ye olde inne".
modified 10-Nov-23 7:00am.
|
|
|
|
|
Shakespeare's works are written in Old English
Shakespeare's works are written in Early Modern English
http://www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/shakespearelanguage.html
🤓
Sorry to be pedantic, but there it is.
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events.
- Manly P. Hall
Mark
Just another cog in the wheel
|
|
|
|
|
No.
Calculus exposes one to the ideas of trends, maxima, minima, limits, etc. All important concepts in data science.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
agree. data scientist must have a good mathematics toolbox
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
I never learned calculus. I had a semester of pre-calculus in college, but it was primarily trigonometry and I only remember that I took it. I also had a semester of statistics, which has been more useful.
Discrete math and Finite math were also required for CS majors.
But I wouldn't call myself a data scientist either. I like working with data and doing some light data analysis, but others are surely better at the heavy stuff than I.
Even if I had learned calculus forty years ago, I wouldn't remember it now unless I had been using it all that time, so it wouldn't help very much, I'd have to re-learn it.
"A man's got to know his limitations." -- Harry Callahan
P.S. Most high school graduates do not need calculus. Or trigonometry. Or Algebra 2. Or geometry.
When I graduated high school I had not yet decided to go into software development.
modified 9-Nov-23 12:41pm.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: P.S. Most high school graduates do not need calculus. Or trigonometry. Or Algebra 2. Or geometry.
But then one can suppose why high school at all?
For example I doubt I really need to know what a verb is. Certainly don't need to figure that out for work.
I also don't need to know about the Russian revolution.
I don't need to know about Freud. (Not convinced anyone should know about some of that nonsense.)
I don't need to simulate erosion in a stream bed.
I certainly don't need to know about running around a field collecting bugs with a net.
Do I really need to know and be tested on the battles of the civil war?
How many hours should I spend being taught the structure of the US government?
Did I really need to know how to create a blueprint on a drafting table?
Did I really need to dissect a frog?
Did I really need to figure out the impact of solids on freezing water?
Then there is the problem of if I don't learn any of that what happens when I finally decide to be a programmer, historian, author, politician, doctor, electrician, biologist, etc? Do I then start learning the above? How do I even know what any of those occupations might even be if I didn't learn some of the basics involved in it?
So if I don't really need to know any of that I don't need to go to school as long as I did. So what do I spend my time doing instead? Crawling around in a loom at a factory to free up problems doesn't sound like much fun (which is what at least some young children were doing before mandatory schooling.)
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: one can suppose why high school at all
Yeah, I almost mentioned that. Most people don't need more than a sixth or eighth grade education.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: sixth or eighth grade education.
Like one Jethro Bodine, he wanted to be a brain surgeon or a 'double naught spy' or a movie producer with the 6th grade education!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
But the question was "whether one needed calculus to be a data scientist?".
I agree with @PIEBALDconsult "P.S. Most high school graduates do not need calculus. Or trigonometry. Or Algebra 2. Or geometry.", with the exception of geometry since it is widely used in careers, trades, and personal calculations.
For your list, there are items to agree and disagree with. I'll just pick two, for example.
- "Don't need to know what a verb is" - Perhaps that is why I often have to waste my time proofreading software instructions and websites that engineers (both software and real engineers), have created to be unintelligible.
- "How many hours should I spend being taught the structure of the US government?". When we look at the state of ignorance of Americans today when it comes to understanding government, I'd say a lot more hours than are currently being taught. At least as many as would be needed to pass the citizenship test given to immigrants.
Several of your items deal with scientific methods, or at least should be taught from that point of view. Those were a prerequisite for statistics in college back in the day.
Of course, you are correct in your conclusion that, without some introduction into many different subjects in high school, how would you know what education to pursue?
I'll leave you with a story. A few years ago, I was riding to a meeting with an acquaintance who had a MS in math and a EdD. I mentioned that requiring algebra 2 was a waste of time for the majority of students. He replied that I, as a computer guy, should understand that algebra 2 teaches logic and reasoning. We happened to be passing by the courthouse, so I told him we should go in the building and give the attorneys and algebra test and see how they do on "logic and reasoning". He was like; "point taken, there are many ways to teach that".
|
|
|
|
|
MikeCO10 wrote: Perhaps that is why I often have to waste my time proofreading software instruction
Being able to write is not the same as being able to parse a sentence into its parts.
And I suspect that most of the people you have a problem with in the above did in fact have years of 'english' classes and quite a bit of discussion about what a verb is.
MikeCO10 wrote: When we look at the state of ignorance of Americans today when it comes to understanding government
However not necessary to actually be a successful programmer.
MikeCO10 wrote: Several of your items deal with scientific methods, or at least should be taught from that point of view.
However in the US only about 16% of degrees are STEM.
MikeCO10 wrote: He was like; "point taken, there are many ways to teach that".
Like philosophy classes of which I took several which specifically taught logic and reasoning.
1. I remember one over-heard discussion where a liberal student who thought of themselves and being smart was having a significant difficulty understanding symbolic logic. (I suspect they could have parsed a sentence though.)
2. In another class a engineering student was having difficulty understand a philosophical concept. Took me years and more experience to realize some 'scientific' people just cannot understand the actual basics and conceptual basis for logic (and science for that matter.)
|
|
|
|
|
Algebraic statistics formulae are available, not just for the Calculus. At my university they taught both.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe. Would learning to become proficient in a language like "R" actually teach the necessary subsets of Calculus used in the statistical packages available through the R libraries?
R (programming language) - Wikipedia[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Not anymore than using a cake mix teaches someone how to bake a cake from scratch.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALD is right. There's a difference between someone who knows what's going on under the hood and a script kiddie.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
