Re: Perry vs. the Math Teacher

perry@imsi.com (Perry E. Metzger) writes:

> the result applicable to factoring, I feel rather sad. Its depressing
> commentary on what cypherpunks has become.
     Go figger. It's become a haven of learning, where the more learned
teach those willing to learn, instead of the self-congratulatory elitist
squad I was told it once was. That's why *I'm* here, to learn from those
who know more than I do. I am VERY willing to learn what others have to
teach. They know more than I do, and there's some very knowledgeable
people here.

     I've recieved some very nice replies to my earlier question about
what O(f(x)) meant, including one from you, Mike McNally, Bill O'Hanlon,
and Douglas Sinclair (thanx guys!! If anyone else sent anything, I haven't
recieved it yet, but you do have my thanx, in advance!). This only proves
that there are people who are only too willing to teach if someone shows
they are willing to listen, and learn.

     The moral of the story is this: Someone had to teach you at one time,
didn't they Perry? One is well-advised to remember, and be humbled by, the
fact that they weren't born knowing everything. Flames in e-mail, please.
Constructive replies always welcome.

                                   --Jeff
--
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| Jeff Gostin                                      jgostin@eternal.pha.pa.us |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| "The risk... is that our vision is too small, our dreams not large enough" |
|                                             -Jim Seymour                   |
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+

>      Go figger. It's become a haven of learning, where the more learned
> teach those willing to learn, instead of the self-congratulatory elitist
> squad I was told it once was. That's why *I'm* here, to learn from those
> who know more than I do. I am VERY willing to learn what others have to
> teach. They know more than I do, and there's some very knowledgeable
> people here.
> 
>      I've recieved some very nice replies to my earlier question about
> what O(f(x)) meant, including one from you, Mike McNally, Bill O'Hanlon,
> and Douglas Sinclair (thanx guys!! If anyone else sent anything, I haven't
> recieved it yet, but you do have my thanx, in advance!). This only proves
> that there are people who are only too willing to teach if someone shows
> they are willing to listen, and learn.

but, there is a basic level of competancy that must b assumed...the big O 
is a basic undergrad concept...same for the MOD function...if u hope to 
ever study a specialty field such as cryptology, u have 2 know the basics...

u should already know undergrad math if u r gonna look at crypto 
algorithms...

brad

> but, there is a basic level of competancy that must b assumed...the big O 
> is a basic undergrad concept...same for the MOD function...if u hope to 
> ever study a specialty field such as cryptology, u have 2 know the basics...
> 
> u should already know undergrad math if u r gonna look at crypto 
> algorithms...
> 
> brad

By the same token, I might say that to communicate in a scholarly manner
one must know how to spell and punctuate with marks other than ellipses.
However, I will not.  As has been pointed out, each of us learned the
basic principles of math and cryptography somewhere.  If we can, in the
course of our discussions, bring others up to that level of understanding
then we will have accomplished much.

Certainly "big O notation" and the modulo operator are studied in undergrad
computer science and mathematics.  However, many of us have never studied
these things.  There are a number of high-school students on the list.  There
are people who have never had the oportunity to study technical subjects.
IMHO, these people are all welcome on cypherpunks and have much to contribute.
When I first joined the list, I was a self taught programmer and had never
been taught the formalisms of "big O notation".  We must not become a 
self-congratulatory elite.

Douglas Sinclair writes:

> By the same token, I might say that to communicate in a scholarly manner
> one must know how to spell and punctuate with marks other than ellipses.
> However, I will not.  As has been pointed out, each of us learned the

I don't understand your use of the term "ellipse" here. You mean like
a circle? Like a big O? O, I see.

(Just kidding. Spelling flames are especially pointless on a list like this.)

> Certainly "big O notation" and the modulo operator are studied in undergrad
> computer science and mathematics.  However, many of us have never studied
> these things.  There are a number of high-school students on the list.  There
> are people who have never had the oportunity to study technical subjects.
> IMHO, these people are all welcome on cypherpunks and have much to contribute.
> When I first joined the list, I was a self taught programmer and had never
> been taught the formalisms of "big O notation".  We must not become a 
> self-congratulatory elite.

None of us knows everything. The things I know little or nothing
about, I stay out of. I think this is reasonable. The list has 500 or
so people on it, and there's no point in 500 people watchin someone
presume to speak on computational complexity without even knowing the
basic terms, such as Big O notation (for which I would recommend _any_
computer science textbook, perhaps Aho, Hopcroft, and Ullman, or even
a more basic text...the new Leiserson, Rivest, etc. text covers a lot
of such things).

On things I know little or nothing about, I just don't post. You won't
see me rambling on about swIPe, encrypted IP tunnels, algebraic number
theory, etc. (Some of these things I know just enough about to know
they are important, but I leave the inner workings for others.)

The recent unpleasantness is just a continuing pattern of someone
getting a bug in his bonnet and not letting a topic drop.

Let's just let it drop.


--Tim May


-- 
..........................................................................
Timothy C. May         | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,  
tcmay@netcom.com       | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
408-688-5409           | knowledge, reputations, information markets, 
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA  | black markets, collapse of governments.
Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
"National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Jeff Gostin says:
> perry@imsi.com (Perry E. Metzger) writes:
> 
> > the result applicable to factoring, I feel rather sad. Its depressing
> > commentary on what cypherpunks has become.
>      Go figger. It's become a haven of learning, where the more learned
> teach those willing to learn,
[...]
>      I've recieved some very nice replies to my earlier question about
> what O(f(x)) meant, including one from you, Mike McNally, Bill O'Hanlon,
> and Douglas Sinclair (thanx guys!! If anyone else sent anything, I haven't
> recieved it yet, but you do have my thanx, in advance!). This only proves
> that there are people who are only too willing to teach if someone shows
> they are willing to listen, and learn.

I was perfectly willing to answer someone asking an honest question.
I've asked many a stupid question myself over the years because I
didn't know a field yet. The point is not that people can't ask
questions or expect polite answers -- its that I resent people who
think that now that they've been handed a rusty saw they know how to
do surgery. You didn't insist that you knew more than other people --
you said you didn't know something so I made an effort to point you at
the answer. I dislike people who are ignorant pretending to themselves
that they know what they don't.

Perry