How and what we observe?

Hello, readers!

Today I'd like to invite you to make an experiment.

Look at the image below.

Now, say out loud what you've just saw and observed. [1]

Please, don't skip this process and do not start to imagine how this is stupid. I think this exercise is going to be extremely important to have a grasp of the whole point of this post.

What did you observe?

There are many ways you could observe it. To list a few:

1. A table;
2. A photo of a table;
3. A 3d model of a real table;
4. A particular composition of woods that looks like a table. Since a table is just an idea (a concept), I'm not looking at an idea;
5. your answer...

If you are a computer scientist (like me) you could answer something like "I can observe a sequence of pixels, since this is a definition of an image and I'm looking at an image". Evidently, there is no correct answer to the question.

The reason why there is no right answer is because the question was too broad. No scope was defined. No contexts. No directions. No theories. [2]

The importance of theories

Karl R. Popper proved in his book: 'Conjectures and Refutations' that there was no way Isaac Newton could devise his laws from pure observation of the world. This is a strong assertive and I suggest you to read the proof if you are interested in more details.

Popper believed that you cannot successfully reach a general theory exclusively through observations. The point is we have to have a system of references to make an observation. It's like a guide in what perspective to use.

Thus, in order to answer the table-observation-problem, you picked out one theory from your experience, probably unconsciously, and thought something like: "I'm gonna look with the eyes of a Platonist (through Platonic ideas), so I'm gonna answer like 4: "A particular composition of woods...".

And not the other way, from observation to theory. [3]

Few words on big data

Today, the term "big data" is a well known buzzword. But what people mean with "doing" big data?

Doing big data, as far as I have seen and known, is trying to fit the data to one of our human theories. The most used are statistics and machine learning. In this particular case of big data, we clearly make a conscious decision of what theory to use to support our observations.

And maybe we should use other theories to look at it...

Till the next post!
Ronald Kaiser

[1] Feel free to comment in this post your answer, ;)

[2] Nevertheless, someone would frown if you say "I can see my grandma through this table!".

[3] Please, don't mess the words look and observe.

On making mistakes

Hello readers!

Today I'm gonna talk briefly about making mistakes.

We, human beings, usually regret ourselves on making mistakes. Avoiding them, undoubtedly, has been an advantage in an evolutionary point of view. Imagine a prehistoric man hunting in a savana. When he stumbled upon a rock while trying to catch a lion he was punished for his mistake with his life.

The work of Karl R. Popper, which I'm reading a lot nowadays, delineates another standpoint about errors, or perhaps, I should say, a discussion in another level.

Popper believed that the only way to get closer to truth (if it exists...) was to trust in reason and be critical. Thus, according to him, making mistakes is not just inevitable, but very necessary to improve our understanding about the world. In few words this is what his critical rationalism is all about.

Similar ideas are pointed out by other 'successful' people:

Seth Godin:

"You say you want innovation...If you're serious about this, you need to celebrate and promote failures" - starts at 10'47''.

Garry Kasparov:

"Let's forget about avoiding mistakes...We want to limit our ability to make mistakes. Making mistakes is like a crime. No! It's a normal part of the thinking process." - starts at 33'30''.

Sherlock Holmes:

When Irene Adler is in scene you can observe that Sherlock Holmes makes more mistakes. And as far as I know, it is an invariant in all Sherlock Holmes movies/series. Watch this video:

In this particular scene, Holmes is easily poisoned. Immediately after being poisoned, he still strives to understand how he was deceived, mentally reconstructing Adler's poisoning strategy. In a nutshell, learning from his mistake.

So, next time you make a mistake, laugh. It probably means that you are trying something new. And most importantly, learn with it!

Till the next time, readers!

Ronald Kaiser

Why did I release suggestmydomain.com ?

What do you think about registering xipne.com as your next domain name?

Let me predict...hmm...you thought it was awful, right? I can hear you saying to yourself: "No one would use it, no one would remember it". Well, perhaps you are right. At least, right at this epoch (around 2013).

Yesterday I released suggestmydomain.com that does such stupid thing; suggests an available domain name randomly. This post is about why I did it.

It's not from another world
I didn't do it alone. My young brother was 80% of the time at my side. I did it to show him very deeply that what he sees around the Internet didn't come from another world; that google.com is not really a magical thing: it's made by people, for people and machines are just tools. Furthermore, he saw that in order to accomplish a goal, obstacles appear and you must face them to succeed.

It had a purpose
Its purpose is clear. When you have a clear purpose and you see its value, it makes a huge difference. You don't waste time in code styling, you deliver what must be delivered. Using suggestmydomain.com is straightforward, you don't need to type anything, just access.

For fun
Not much to comment about this.

XKCD
What's the meaning of XKCD? As far as I know, none. Answer me, sincerely, do you really think xkcd.com is a good name? The point is content matters, not names. If you have a good content, don't be fooled by what people say about "best practices" for domain names; people will be forced to remember your name.

Look at the mirror
Writing this post made me think...why didn't I choose a random name for suggestmydomain.com too? Hmm...I will, soon, ;)


Special thanks
Special thanks to my love Juliana, helping me in so many ways I couldn't imagine. Many thanks for your help! You know you are part of it too. I love you!!!


That's all for now, folks

Till the next post!
Ronald Kaiser

Serendipity

Decidi abrir uma exceção e criar o primeiro post em português deste blog. Costumo escrever em inglês para praticar outra língua, mas hoje aconteceu algo diferente e gostaria de compartilhar.

Hoje, por felicidade do acaso, encontrei a revista "Cálculo -- matemática para todos" na banca. Foi uma surpresa muito feliz ler a carta ao leitor escrita por Márcio Simões, editor da revista. Em sua "carta", Márcio Simões faz uma crítica a educação brasileira, principalmente no que consiste ao ensino de matemática. Senti-me na obrigação de compartilhar com mais pessoas e para tanto, resolvi postar aqui. Fico contente em saber que ainda existem pessoas que pensam dessa forma.  

"Outro dia, entrei numa padaria perto do escritório, me sentei ao balcão e pedi uma xícara de café com leite e um pão com manteiga.

Enquanto esperava, abri meu livro de cálculo e meu caderno e passei a resolver exercícios. Um sujeito com roupas de operário da construção civil (macacão, botas e capacete) se sentou ao meu lado, fez o pedido e ficou olhando de esguelha meu caderno. Logo puxou conversa:

-- Você estuda engenharia?

Perguntei de volta:

-- Quem estuda cálculo estuda engenharia, é isso?

Passamos a conversar, e ele me contou que gostaria de estudar engenharia para conseguir uma promoção na firma em que trabalha, mas que tinha medo do cálculo. Seus colegas lhe diziam que é superdifícil. Eu disse o que sempre digo: não é verdade. E dei minha receita: compre um livro bom, desligue a TV, leia cada trecho com atenção, faça todos os exercícios, descubra meios de verificar sozinho se acertou ou errou, investigue por que errou um exercício, e por fim volte e releia o trecho do livro. Nessa releitura, com os exercícios já feitos e refeitos, as coisas ficam mais claras. Eu disse também que, embora o cálculo fosse útil na minha profissão (não entrei em detalhes), no fundo estudava cálculo por prazer. Ele riu; achou que eu estava brincando. Depois, quando insisti nisso, ele passou a me olhar como se eu estivesse mentindo.

Se um sujeito abre um romance na padaria, para ler enquanto toma o café da manhã, ninguém vai estranhar a cena, e se o sujeito disser que lê romances por prazer, ninguém vai achá-lo mentiroso. A sociedade brasileira incentiva o hábito de ler romances. Mas ela não incentiva o hábito de estudar matemática -- ao contrário.

De modo geral, o brasileiro acha que só estuda matemática quem é obrigado; além disso, uma pessoa só deve estudá-la sob a supervisão de um professor, isto é, só deve estudá-la dentro de uma escola. Como consequência, o brasileiro só estuda aquilo que o professor manda, e só estuda aquilo que dá tempo de estudar ao longo de um curso qualquer. Mas nem todo professor manda bem, e 100% dos cursos duram pouco. Em cinco anos de faculdade, por melhor que ela seja, só dá para estudar uns poucos tópicos da matemática, e mesmo assim de modo superficial.

Não existe saída, portanto: se alguém deseja saber matemática bem, terá de aprender a escolher livros (o que é difícil, pois à primeira vista eles se parecem muito) e a estudá-los sozinho. Se puder estudá-los em público, numa padaria ou num parque, tanto melhor. Quem sabe as crianças, vendo a cena, não crescem achando que estão autorizadas a se divertir com livros de matemáticas?

Márcio Simões"

Sob o potencial de ser incriminado por plágio, quero deixar claro que não é minha intenção lucrar com a cópia do conteúdo que apresentei. Meu objetivo é simplesmente compartilhar bom conteúdo e divulgar o bom trabalho que outras pessoas estão fazendo. Ademais, quem puder e se interessar, comprem a revista!

Até o próximo post!

Ronald Kaiser

Feedly first impressions

Today I was looking for a feed aggregator.
Previous attempts using Google Reader were not successful for me. Google reader's interface on a daily basis, becomes poor and cluttered. I'm not capable of keep reading for a long time.

Googling, I found out an alternative that at first sight, seemed to me very striking: Feedly. Its interface is well polished and pleasant to read. Furthermore, its organizing style is straightforward and efficient.
According to Wikipedia, Google Reader is 7 years old (first release in 2005) while Feedly only 4 (first release in 2008). For a while, I choose the younger one! It's working charmingly for me, =)
Leave a comment with your impressions on feed readers, ;)


Till the next post!
Ronald Kaiser