dclinton

Surely it's going to far to conclude from this that Dunning-Kruger isn't real. Seems to me the strongest conclusion we can draw from this is that there are at least two possible explanations for the result. How do we determine which explanation is correct?

My son is 12 and a half. I have recently handed him a copy of "Learn you a Haskell..." and a laptop running ghci. He has been making his way through the first couple of chapters with only a little help from me, and seems to be understanding everything that's come up so far.

Most of the comments on here seem to be talking about whether the name is good or not. For me, the question isn't what a 'monoid' is called, or whether it can be defined in a few lines of English, but rather what it is that they are useful for.

I've been using Scala full time for a couple of years now, but it took me ten months to really understand not just what monads are, but how they are useful in expressing a program from a different perspective to other approaches, and the benefits that come from that. Now I use them all the time and see how they add huge benefits to my code.

In all the time that I've been working with Scala, and building my knowledge and experience of how to apply functional principles usefully, I have yet to (knowingly) use a Monoid, or encounter a situation where it was clear that they would have a benefit. I'm not saying that there are no such situations, and it may be that there have been situations where they would have been useful, but I didn't know it, and I would love to be able to add them to my toolbox. However, I do see that a lot of the time these concepts are introduced in a very abstract way and what it missing is not the simple definition, but rather some clear idea of when, how and why to use them.

MarketWatch are a complete rag of a financial news site. As in this case, most of their headlines are sensationalist link-bait. I guess that makes me a fool for even reading the article.

Look at the chart and it's clear that Tesla's stock price has not 'tanked'; it's trading well within the range it's been in for some time. They are not "defaulting" on their loan, they are re-negotiating it.

Did you read their article on bitcoin? In the first paragraph they pretty much claim that it was invented to let people buy porn anonymously over the internet. That article is not going to do bitcoin any favours at all. And as for their handy "infographic" on what happens when a transaction takes place...