[HN Gopher] Substitute certain overhyped programming terms with ...
___________________________________________________________________
Substitute certain overhyped programming terms with more accurate
replacements
Author : huijzer
Score : 50 points
Date : 2022-10-26 10:44 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (addons.mozilla.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (addons.mozilla.org)
| cercatrova wrote:
| Reminds me of several years ago when the extension Cloud to Butt
| was popular, which (predictably) replaces mentions of the "cloud"
| with "butt" [0]. It created at least a few funny stories [1].
|
| I guess when the cloud hype blew over, new hypes emerged only to
| be tackled by extensions like these.
|
| [0] https://github.com/panicsteve/cloud-to-butt
|
| [1]
| https://old.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/3zdnoh/tifu_by_forget...
| Twirrim wrote:
| I remember when some AWS employees had that extension installed
| in their browser and unintentionally wrecked havoc on the
| internal wiki with it. There were these various trails of
| devastation until the word got out that maybe this extension is
| a bad idea when you work for a cloud.
| Verdex wrote:
| The existence of cloud->butt is kind of humorous. "Look, this
| thing is overhyped by people who don't understand it. What if
| we :s/cloud/butt/g, but like in an addon?" Yeah, I get it.
| Very clever.
|
| I don't understand actually using it though. I mean, I sort
| of get it. Perhaps, deep down, everyone is easy to amuse;
| it's just a question of what domain are they easily amused
| by. But do you really want to give yourself programmatic word
| aphasia?
|
| Doing it a second time, years later, feels more strange. Like
| watching a child who copies a joke made by an adult without
| understanding the structure or semantics of the joke, I find
| myself nervously smiling at the presentation before me.
|
| And then you come along, "AWS employees ... extension
| installed ... wrecked havoc ...". Yes, that seems like a
| predictable result. Thank you for your anecdote, I kind of
| expected that to be the case and it at least feels good to
| hear that my understanding of the world matches someone's
| experience.
| vlunkr wrote:
| The fun thing about cloud->butt for me was that is showed
| up infrequently enough that I would forget about it and
| occasionally be really confused. Like when a company called
| cloudplugs showed up on tech news sites. Everyone needs a
| little chaos in their work day.
| LanceH wrote:
| Placeholder text will find a way into production -- make it
| safe. Lorem ipsum exists for a reason.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >I don't understand actually using it though.
|
| Why not? Some people can "Yeah, I get it. Very Clever."
| just from the description. Some people _CAN 'T_. The proof
| of this is in math class where people struggle with word
| problems. You are in the category of people that get it
| from description only. Have empathy for the people that
| need to see it in action.
|
| Also, you know, it's fun. Don't ruin it for others because
| you can't/won't/don't
| Verdex wrote:
| > Have empathy for the people that need to see it in
| action.
|
| With the full context of my comment, I feel that I've
| given sufficient empathy for people who aren't me.
|
| > I mean, I sort of get it. Perhaps, deep down, everyone
| is easy to amuse; it's just a question of what domain are
| they easily amused by.
|
| Is this not an allowance?
|
| > Also, you know, it's fun. Don't ruin it for others
| because you can't/won't/don't
|
| I hope I wasn't ruining anyone's fun by being unable to
| properly comprehend how they choose to have it and
| verbalizing that incomprehension. Although, if speaking
| with uncertainty about a topic is enough to ruin
| someone's fun, then I feel I should note that I find fun
| in making overly wordy comments about how I don't
| understand other people. I implore you not to ruin _my_
| fun because you can 't/won't/don't.
|
| Although, I suspect my fun has never wrecked an internal
| wiki. I'll leave it to historians to judge between my fun
| and theirs.
| notfish wrote:
| I like to play a game with my future self by laying down
| little traps I know I'll fall into and be confused by. I
| call it singleplayer pranking, it's great!
| regular wrote:
| The term is WREAKED havoc, FYI.
| dooglius wrote:
| Did the "cloud hype" really "blow over"? Seems to be a pretty
| big thing nowadays.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| It's passed through the hype cycle to now be mainstream -
| whether that's a good or a bad thing is left up as an
| exercise to the reader. All major companies I've worked with
| / for are in the cloud now.
| jerf wrote:
| Some of the hype has disappeared too. I remember when there
| was a general idea that cloud would "eliminate" your need
| to have ops teams, because you won't need them, Amazon just
| takes care of it for you! Now everybody knows that's not
| true. It might reduce it vs. a datacenter but certainly you
| need people setting up cloud resources and diagnosing
| problems. I also remember when the idea was floating around
| that simply being in the cloud made your software
| resilient, period. Now I think there's a greater
| understanding you still need to do some things to get that
| result, even if it's easier than doing it all yourself.
|
| Also haven't heard as much about it being cheap. Again, it
| might still be cheaper than some other options, but it
| certainly isn't the case that it's just magically cheaper.
| The thriving field of companies who help you reduce your
| cloud spend is evidence of that....
| ollifi wrote:
| I remember it was also that cloud as a term was pure
| marketing hype. Unnecessary rebranding of a thing we
| already had a good name for, servers. And also to pick
| such a irrational name "cloud" which didn't relate to
| technology at all. You could hear everyone use it in
| nonsense high flying keynotes. All the hands-on computer
| people laughed at it and I think cloud to butt was part
| of that.
|
| In the end it's actually really good word for newish
| concept and using it does not feel silly to me anymore.
| intelVISA wrote:
| AWS must be laughing, those sly dogs.
| Semaphor wrote:
| TFA:
|
| > Inspired by and adapted from the infamous [cloud-to-
| butt](https://github.com/panicsteve/cloud-to-butt) extension,
| as originally released under the WTFPL (here BSD0)
| cercatrova wrote:
| Ah I didn't see the About this Extension part, just read the
| description underneath the title.
| watashiato wrote:
| Relevant XKCD
|
| https://xkcd.com/1288/ https://xkcd.com/1625/
| https://xkcd.com/1679/
|
| This is one of those things you'd better do with a userscript
| instead of yet another addon. Way more flexible too.
| sp332 wrote:
| Or more specificaly https://xkcd.com/1838/
| enriquto wrote:
| You forgot this one: https://xkcd.com/1031/
| jshprentz wrote:
| And this one: https://xkcd.com/2304/
| theknocker wrote:
| eimrine wrote:
| > Substitute certain overhyped programming terms, such as "Deep
| Learning", and "Machine Learning", and "Artificial Intelligence"
| with more accurate replacements such as "Linear Algebra", "IF
| Statements", and "BS That Doesn't Exist Yet", respectively.
|
| There was an article that NNs are just a decision trees, sounds
| better then "if statements".
| wolfium3 wrote:
| If you expand a NN to decision trees, the resulting decision
| tree(s) can take up orders of magnitude more space and take
| orders of magnitude more time to run than the original NN.
|
| The paper is discussed here:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_okxGdHM5b8
| titzer wrote:
| So...compressed decision trees?
| [deleted]
| sigstoat wrote:
| at that point most things are compressed decision trees.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Possibly related: learning is isomorphic to compression,
| and the two may be in fact fundamentally the same thing.
| mncharity wrote:
| Oh, wow. I'd long thought of my own learning as "when
| reality surprises, isn't merely what you'd expect, isn't
| "obvious", then fix that, with emphasis on simplicity and
| generality". I'd not recognized that as compression.
| m3047 wrote:
| Counter argument: For every trainable NN, there exists an
| equivalent, sparser [edit] trained NN.
|
| https://numenta.com/blog/2019/08/30/case-for-sparsity-in-
| neu...
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20211130211241/https://www.bhaut.
| ..
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03635
| jnwatson wrote:
| NNs are decision trees only if all the activation functions are
| step functions, which makes sense intuitively.
| ClassyJacket wrote:
| A generalization of Cloud-to-Butt!
|
| >Substitute certain overhyped programming terms, such as "Deep
| Learning", and "Machine Learning", and "Artificial Intelligence"
| with more accurate replacements such as "Linear Algebra", "IF
| Statements", and "BS That Doesn't Exist Yet", respectively.
|
| Wouldn't deep learning be more accurately described as
| "calculus"?
| dylan604 wrote:
| Is deep learning focused on calculating the area under curves?
| sdenton4 wrote:
| Galaxy brain: Calculus is also linear algebra.
| nathias wrote:
| how aggressively idiotic
| smcin wrote:
| You haven't seen the extravagant claims marketing, bloggers and
| futurists have been peddling in the name of ML, 'AI', or its
| even more wish-object cousin, 'AGI'.
|
| I've had to sit through some excruciating sessions.
| entwife wrote:
| I look forward to citing this in formal writing. Thanks.
| hallqv wrote:
| Machine learning = if statements? Now that is some proper BS
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Full form should be "if statements with extra steps" :).
|
| (Personally, I feel "linear regression" is a better substitute
| phrase.)
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| While I agree these terms are abused, the author exaggerates in
| the opposite direction. Granted, AI understood as AGI is "BS that
| doesn't exist" (yet?). But DL and ML are working quite well and
| delivering decent results. It's true they're overhyped by
| unscrupulous marketers and greedy CEOs trying to grab more money
| from VC, but thanks to these technologies you can have pretty
| accurate text recognition, for example (and, to a lesser degree,
| although still impressive, also speech recognition).
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-26 23:01 UTC)