tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post6568339899377535065..comments2024-03-10T05:26:42.148-04:00Comments on My Biased Coin: Blog Posts of the DayMichael Mitzenmacherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06738274256402616703noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-66282551759075496752009-10-03T17:39:09.082-04:002009-10-03T17:39:09.082-04:00To the anonymous before this: do you really believ...To the anonymous before this: do you really believe that it's Mihai who is posting all these? I don't and I am not Mihai.. I am just a grad student at some "not top 5" TCS schools, and I find it completely dumb to think that Mihai is posting all these comments. What I conclude is that you're a Mihai-hater and need help.<br /><br />Mihai is just different. It is not surprising he's a bit controversial and he's certainly not the first person who is a bit different and is attracting some controversy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-185386310476195472009-10-02T12:55:18.716-04:002009-10-02T12:55:18.716-04:00A lot of the anonymous comments defending Mihai so...A lot of the anonymous comments defending Mihai sound like Mihai himself. Maybe it's time people stop responding to him - it's a big timesink. It's okay for a field to have one crazy person, but it's a problem if the whole field gets involved in his craziness on a regular basis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-82365248286697496922009-10-02T00:41:36.291-04:002009-10-02T00:41:36.291-04:00Just to follow up on this thread: I am a theory fa...<i><br />Just to follow up on this thread: I am a theory faculty member at a top-20 school, and went to grad school at a (different) top-20 school. The Intro Grad Algorithms class at both does not cover most of these topics,</i><br /><br />Likely they <b>were</b> covered but under different names. The predecessor problem is usually called "binary search trees", dynamic optimality is called splay trees, connectivity is called BFS/DFS.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-67477388409970712032009-10-01T21:34:59.726-04:002009-10-01T21:34:59.726-04:00"Range counting, predecessor, voronoi diagram...<em>"Range counting, predecessor, voronoi diagrams, dynamic optimality, planar point location, nearest neighbor, partial sums, connectivity."...</em><br /><br />Just to follow up on this thread: I am a theory faculty member at a top-20 school, and went to grad school at a (different) top-20 school. The Intro Grad Algorithms class at both does not cover most of these topics, and I can see how a theory person doing something other than algorithms might not be aware of these topics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-10896673187590684892009-10-01T20:39:53.609-04:002009-10-01T20:39:53.609-04:00"Seriously.. take it out on a bottle of anti-..."Seriously.. take it out on a bottle of anti-depressants, not theory blogs."<br /><br />Hi Buddy, not everybody who disagree with Mihai's greatness needs anti-depressants. <br /><br />Suppose that you work in cryptography and know very little about data structures, then suddenly there is a guy named Mihai who you never hear before jumping out claiming he is the biggest star ever produced in TCS, what is your natural reaction? <br /><br />I believe that most problems in academic worlds, especially in math, are studied by < 5 people. That is why I find academy so attractive. You feel that you are one of the few people in the world who really care about the problem. The problem somehow becomes your kid. I may be wrong in Mihai's case, but please allow people to have a different opinion. <br /><br />My last suggestion to you:<br />Do not get too excited about some anonymous comments from "nobody". It is not worthy it, OK?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-58625619793135567752009-10-01T19:24:55.135-04:002009-10-01T19:24:55.135-04:00Prev anon:
Please don't conflate my comments ...Prev anon:<br /><br />Please don't conflate my comments with the anonymous poster below mine. :) I wasn't trying to argue the relative merits of Mihai's work vs. that of others; I'm certainly not qualified to judge in that area. I was simply trying to say that someone's personality characteristics and the merit of their technical work are independent variables. I don't think it's intellectually honest to downplay someone's technical contribution because of the personality aspects.<br /><br />But that <i>doesn't</i> have anything to do with the decision about who you want as a colleague. I agree completely with you on that note, and I believe it's both fair and rational to consider a job candidate <i>in toto</i> -- after all, you're going to have to work with them for potentially many years.David Andersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03996590425188586871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-16185265687969113222009-10-01T19:05:44.071-04:002009-10-01T19:05:44.071-04:00There's something to be said on both sides of ...<i> There's something to be said on both sides of this debate for representing (seeing?) the world the way it is. <br /><br />Mihai's work is very impressive, and I think way beyond the ability of most people.[...]If you think about it objectively, there is something disturbing about the fact that one of the strongest graduates was not even interviewed at top schools.<br /><br />Is it really a popularity contest, and not about science?<br /><br /></i><br /><br />I am afraid I disagree with some of the implications here. <br /><br />First of all, I agree that Mihai's work is technically solid, and on important problems.<br /><br />But Mihai's post basically claims that his work is superior to that of his competitors. He suggests that the fact that a school that rates Costis above him in their ranking "cast(s) some doubt in [his] mind regarding [their] long-term strategy for becoming one of the top research departments in the theory of computation."<br /><br />Putting aside the issue of what other factors ucsd may be taking into account other than raw research power, I strongly disagree with the suggestion that Costis' work, or research ability is weaker than Mihai's. In fact, I think anyone familiar with the work of both of them (excluding Mihai, but including Mihai's letter writers) would consider it absurd to make such a claim.<br /><br />I don't think doing research in a popular area automatically makes it weaker. Having an impact on areas outside of CS does not automatically make the CS contribution weaker. Both Costis and Mihai solved long open problems. Both were technically challenging. Just because one of them was on questions few people have thought about in a decade or two does not make it automatically stronger. <br /><br />So No. Thinking that you are better than others when the rest of the world seems to disagree is not "representing (seeing?) the world the way it is."<br /><br />And No. It is not a popularity contest, but something popular can also be good science.<br /><br />As a side note, given two candidates with comparable scientific contribution, I think anyone would prefer someone who is pleasant, someone who can understand and appreciate what his/her colleagues do, someone who is capable of working with other people, someone who will not have be handled with care lest he get upset.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-775783898436646102009-10-01T18:11:14.119-04:002009-10-01T18:11:14.119-04:00I wonder how much jealousy has to do with all of t...I wonder how much jealousy has to do with all of this. Mihai's work is <b>very</b> impressive, and I think way beyond the ability of most people. So it's quite natural to be jealous of him (I know I am), and therefore to pounce on him given the chance.<br /><br />If you think about it objectively, there is something disturbing about the fact that one of the strongest graduates <b>was not even interviewed</b> at top schools.<br /><br />Is it really a popularity contest, and not about science?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-27215529186677715802009-10-01T17:37:17.154-04:002009-10-01T17:37:17.154-04:00M, and earlier anon: I'll weigh in briefly on...M, and earlier anon: I'll weigh in briefly on this, as a non-theory person who likes theory. I think that the claim that "most undergraduates" will have encountered these concepts is probably a reach -- as someone who took the graphics track (hey, I was at Utah - it was hard to resist) as an option instead of the theory track, I wasn't exposed to too many of them. But the introductory graduate algorithms course at MIT hit more than half of them.<br /><br />It's clear that Mihai's post violated some widely-assumed social contract (I'll confess that I found it offensive), but in Mihai's defense, he's done an impressive body of technical work. There's something to be said on both sides of this debate for representing (seeing?) the world the way it is. There's nothing particularly contradictory or novel in being technically talented while having a talent for, ahh, irking others. :)David Andersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03996590425188586871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-32557387639513166292009-10-01T17:25:15.043-04:002009-10-01T17:25:15.043-04:00"A good case can be made that most concepts
(..."A good case can be made that most concepts<br />(including data-structures in TCS) are trivial once one has sufficient mathematical maturity and experience (say dealing with abstract structures). <br />Thus, its good just to take math graduate courses. The TCS concepts can be picked up later without too much effort. In this way one can be first rate mathematician working in TCS which really is a branch of pure math."<br /><br />yea.. sure.. whatever helps you sleep at night...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-22758432288394364762009-10-01T17:21:35.784-04:002009-10-01T17:21:35.784-04:00Hahahaha! So because you don't know the listed...Hahahaha! So because you don't know the listed problems, and consequently the list of people who has worked on them.. this implies the problems are unheard of and less than 5 people work on them.. I would really suggest getting mental help at this point because your self-centeredness is off the charts.<br /><br />Most of the problems listed (Range counting, predecessor, voronoi diagrams, dynamic optimality, planar point location, nearest neighbor, partial sums, connectivity) are fundamental, important, and/or have a lot of people working on them. <br /><br />I don't like Mihai's antics for many reasons but you attacking his body of work is laughable at best. <br /><br />What's even dumber is you downplaying the importance of problems he works on (like putting down predecessor) just to attack Mihai. Mihai didn't come up with the problem. So if you hate Alex Andoni, you're gonna say the nearest neighbors problem is some obscure problem nobody works on?<br /><br />Seriously.. take it out on a bottle of anti-depressants, not theory blogs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-7317140027567610382009-10-01T16:31:50.269-04:002009-10-01T16:31:50.269-04:00doesn't this give you a nagging feeling that y...<i>doesn't this give you a nagging feeling that you (along with the rest of the STOC/FOCS community) are letting yourself become a second-rate mathematician instead of a first-rate computer scientist?<br /></i><br /><br />A good case can be made that most concepts<br />(including data-structures in TCS) are trivial once one has sufficient mathematical maturity and experience (say dealing with abstract structures). <br />Thus, its good just to take math graduate courses. The TCS concepts can be picked up later without too much effort. In this way one can be first rate mathematician working in TCS which really is a branch of pure math.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-11092457010447516252009-10-01T15:20:47.568-04:002009-10-01T15:20:47.568-04:00"I have my PhD in theoretical CS, but have ne..."I have my PhD in theoretical CS, but have never heard of Braverman, and don't understand what "prime is in P" means -- never heard of that problem. But at least I know what connectivity is."<br /><br />Vow, I envy you because you can study Mihai's great papers now. Keep on the good work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-78654034478069144092009-10-01T13:02:33.214-04:002009-10-01T13:02:33.214-04:00I want to apologize again for my post. To make any...I want to apologize again for my post. To make anybody other than Mihai mad is not my intention (actually I do not even want to make Mihai mad). I think that there is a misunderstanding when I said that a problem <5 people care. There is nothing negative about it. Most of academic problems are like that, including the problem I am working on now. That is why we are called ivory tower, right? And you donot need to solve pnp problem to get your papers into S/F, trust me. <br /><br />--NobodyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-49722431217014008502009-10-01T13:02:23.932-04:002009-10-01T13:02:23.932-04:00When I Google "predecessor problem," cli...When I Google "predecessor problem," click on the first result, and scroll down, the name "David Eppstein" immediately jumps out. So, with all due respect, I think the professor's perception of the importance of knowing the problem might be somewhat biased. My undergrad was in CS and I took four algorithms courses (2 undergrad, 2 grad, all at two of the top five rated CS schools in the country). I read the algorithms book for my first course from front to back. Most of my papers, though not in CS, have an algorithmic component. Still, I seriously doubt that "every computer science undergraduate who takes an algorithms course is exposed to most if not all of these problems." Maybe it's the case at UCI, which I've visited and have nothing but respect for, but not at other schools which are such as good. In fact, most of the topics listed I learned in <i>other</i> classes, not TCS classes.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14749446395269735704noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-70858051366515619512009-10-01T13:00:23.563-04:002009-10-01T13:00:23.563-04:00By the way, I'm not sure "prime is in P&q...By the way, I'm not sure "prime is in P" is the best example of a result with respect from the general math community.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-39639033124614094512009-10-01T12:40:13.244-04:002009-10-01T12:40:13.244-04:00"Anyway, I think to be jumpy and cocky, you n..."Anyway, I think to be jumpy and cocky, you need results like "prime is in P", which gain respect from general math community, "<br /><br />Why would you assume gaining the respect of the general math community is a priority or even a goal?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-25550751416639237872009-10-01T12:12:42.939-04:002009-10-01T12:12:42.939-04:00"ignorance"? "immaturity"?? &q...<i>"ignorance"? "immaturity"?? "stupidity" ???<br />"disgusted"?! "mental midgets"!!! "nobody" (?) </i><br /><br /><br />Are you sure you feel OK?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-50354650686742356422009-10-01T12:00:10.663-04:002009-10-01T12:00:10.663-04:00Anyway, I think to be jumpy and cocky, you need re...<i> Anyway, I think to be jumpy and cocky, you need results like "prime is in P", which gain respect from general math community, or at least you need sth like recent result of Braverman,<br />that every theory blogs mention. </i> <br /><br />I have my PhD in theoretical CS, but have never heard of Braverman, and don't understand what "prime is in P" means -- never heard of that problem. But at least I know what connectivity is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-74593898176850199862009-10-01T09:34:50.562-04:002009-10-01T09:34:50.562-04:00Yes I am a nobody, but I am a nobody but not cocky...Yes I am a nobody, but I am a nobody but not cocky and jumpy in public, is it a little better than Mihai, which is nobody in my view, but acts very jumpy and cocky?<br /><br />Anyway, I think to be jumpy and cocky, you need results like "prime is in P", which gain respect from general math community, or at least you need sth like recent result of Braverman,<br />that every theory blogs mention. If you do not have things like these, you are a nobody, just try to calm down and work. If the threshold is too low, the TCS is going to look like a kinder garden.<br /><br />Sorry that my post may offer you in some way. My deepest apologies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-41209812817708725962009-10-01T02:22:19.885-04:002009-10-01T02:22:19.885-04:00""Range counting, predecessor, voronoi d...""Range counting, predecessor, voronoi diagrams, dynamic optimality, planar point location, nearest neighbor, partial sums, connectivity."<br /><br />I got my phd in computer science theory, but I have never heard about the problems you listed. "<br /><br />The only thing more amazing than your ignorance, immaturity, and stupidity is how polite and composed D. Eppstein was in his response to you. <br /><br />What kind of CS PhD brags about avoiding fundamental CS education? <br /><br />I mean it might be acceptable at some level to not be familiar with certain topics however fundamental they may be, especially if you are a specialist; but really.. you're proud of this? <br /><br /><br />I am not really offended by anything you said. I just feel disgusted that mental midgets like you exist within the community. But then again, you're probably a nobody...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-69412823711507735452009-10-01T01:45:41.040-04:002009-10-01T01:45:41.040-04:00The funny thing is, I always feel that I have enou...<i>The funny thing is, I always feel that I have enough computer science and do not have enough math when doing TCS.</i><br /><br />To play Mihai for a moment, doesn't this give you a nagging feeling that you (along with the rest of the STOC/FOCS community) are letting yourself become a second-rate mathematician instead of a first-rate computer scientist?<br /><br />I'm not trying to put down math. Math is good. I use lots of math all the time. I love math, for its own sake and for its applications to CS. Many of my papers are really math with little or no computer science content. But we should be developing our own math, not just being an import/export industry from the real mathematicians, and to do that requires not just mathematical sophistication but also a deep understanding of the computational structures we're trying to study.D. Eppsteinhttp://11011110.livejournal.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-27700825501243183452009-10-01T01:14:14.482-04:002009-10-01T01:14:14.482-04:00continue from the 21
The funny thing is, I always...continue from the 21<br /><br />The funny thing is, I always feel that I have enough computer science and do not have enough math when doing TCS.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-17083471804847577482009-10-01T01:12:22.561-04:002009-10-01T01:12:22.561-04:00Taking math courses (or otherwise learning the mat...Taking math courses (or otherwise learning the material): good. But avoiding learning basic computer science (and getting a computer science Ph.D. anyway): not good.<br /><br />Fortunately you can still learn. Go read <a href="http://courses.csail.mit.edu/6.897/spring03/scribe_notes/" rel="nofollow">Demaine's lecture notes on data structures</a>. Or if that's too much jumping into the deep end, start with the data structure sections of CLRS, but don't stop with them: data structures are CLRS' weakest point.D. Eppsteinhttp://11011110.livejournal.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-12140012382712900322009-10-01T01:06:50.974-04:002009-10-01T01:06:50.974-04:00I try everything I can to take as many math cours...I try everything I can to take as many math courses as possible and to avoid computer science courses. Should I feel embarrassed for being called a computer science phd? I guess so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com