undefined | Better HN

0 pointsalganet8mo ago0 comments

> You couldn't be more wrong.

Explanation missing.

> If you've ever programmed, or worked with programmers, that is not an extraordinary claim at all.

One step ahead of you. I already say this is engineered to encourage belief "I want to be good, big brain, and open source is good, I want to be good big brain".

It's marketing.

> A mental model of the software is what allows a programmer [yadda yadda]

I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I'm saying the paper doesn't provide any relevant information regarding the phenomena.

> Those neural pathways can only be activated by natural learning and manual programming.

Again, probably true. But the paper doesn't provide any relevant information regarding this phenomena.

---

Your answer seems to disagree with me, but displays a disjointed understanding of what I'm really addressing.

---

As a lighthearted fun analogy, I present:

https://isotropic.org/papers/chicken.pdf

The paper does not prove the existence of chickens. It says chicken a lot, but never addresses the phenomena of chickens existing.

0 comments

imiric8mo ago

I'm confused by what your point is, then. You want evidence of an abstraction that exists in the minds of experienced developers? That's like asking for evidence of humor or love. We accept these things as real because of shared experiences, not because of concrete evidence.

alganetOP8mo ago

My point is that the paper has no point, the article on the paper is a stretch, and none of this is relevant in any way except creating chatter.

It's useless from the research perspective. But it is a cup-holder for marketing something.

I already laid this out very clearly in my first comment.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse