HN user

stiff

4,244 karma
Posts12
Comments676
View on HN

William Cleveland did some research along those lines and he wrote two good books:

    - The elements of graphing data

    - Visualizing data
The first one is of general interest, the second one more specialized for statisticians.

The book has eight voluminous chapters and only one is about hypothesis testing. Much of it is about design of experiments and statistical process control, think something like optimizing the workings of a factory. Hypothesis testing has been under attack in psychology/economics/etc., as part of I think a broader problem those disciplines have drawing reliable conclusions in general, since it is difficult to control all the variables. This book is about engineering and industrial applications which are closer to physics.

Here are a few popular science books:

  One Two Three . . . Infinity: Facts and Speculations of Science by George Gamow
  Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite by Rudy Rucker
  Yearning for the Impossible: The Surprising Truths of Mathematics by John Stillwell
  Roads to Infinity by John Stillwell
If you want actual textbooks then maybe pick up a set theory textbook like "Naive set theory" by Halmos.

Stanford has ENGR108 [1] based on freely available book "Introduction to Applied Linear Algebra – Vectors, Matrices, and Least Squares" [2] by Stephen Boyd, with video lectures [3] available. EE263 [4] is sort of a continuation of this at a more advaneced level, it originally also was developed by Boyd and also has video lectures available [5]

[1] https://stanford.edu/class/engr108/

[2] https://web.stanford.edu/~boyd/vmls/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR6G1MUMveE

[4] https://ee263.stanford.edu/

[5] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL06960BA52D0DB32B

Probability (1963) 4 years ago

I think these people other than Feynman transcribed and edited the lectures into book form. This seems to have been the process with most (all?) books of his, "QED" and "The character of physical law" were also delivered as lectures and even "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" was an interview originally that was later transcribed and edited.

Paul Halmos wrote a book I like a lot titled "Linear Algebra Problem Book" that teaches you linear algebra through a sequence of problems - its different from the one posted here in that the problems are often preceded by 2-3 pages of discussion/motivation and almost all of them are conceptual and interesting.

Production failures due to bugs in both TCP-based servers and clients happen all the time, long time ago I invested a little time to learn basic socket programming in C and the ROI on this has really been spectacular. "Unix Network Programming" by Stevens is a great book on this topic, in particular it carefully discusses all the different ways things can go wrong. Wish there was something more up to date that could be recommended, but I don't know anything of comparable quality, so I think you still have to read it and later work out all the Linux-specific details, more modern APIs like epoll etc.

For interviews and programming puzzles you only need to know notation for basic mathematical logic, basic set theory and the summation notation and maybe some bits and pieces from number theory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_connective#Common_logi...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantifier_(logic)#Notation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_theory#Basic_concepts_and_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summation#Capital-sigma_notati...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_arithmetic#Congruence

If Wikipedia is too hard to follow, you can learn this from early chapters of a discrete mathematics textbook.

I watched the TV series some weeks or months after having seen the Gary Oldman movie, I enjoyed both, but the TV series is great while the movie I thought was just good. Both have excellent cast and are worth watching just for this reason, but the story with all the nuance seems better suited for the mini-series format than for a 2 hour movie.

I disagree, it's trivial these days to get a list of anything (books, movies, software etc.) simply from google, so if you are going to manually compose a list it better be A) really strictly selected based on true personal experience B) contain any kind of explanation why the item made the list. It's not supposed to turn into an encylopedia, but e.g. I find annotated bibliographies with 2-3 sentences of comments by someone knowledgeable in the field much more valuable than just a list of books.

A dishonest scientist can mine a dataset for statistically significant hypotheses and for a long time no institutional protection against it was in place:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging

https://www.xkcd.com/882/

Machine learning makes it easier to test great many hypothesis, but even going fully "by hand" it is very easy to deviate from what the statistical framework of hypothesis testing would demand. There are now some discussions about counter-measures, e.g. about preregistration of studies:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/09/more-and-more-scienti...

You can see this as another chapter in the long debate about the correct way to test scientific hypotheses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing...

Systemd as tragedy 7 years ago

They changed a decades-old behavior many people rely on, and it must have been obvious from the start people will loose work because of it.