I have not detected anything wrong with mathacademy, it does what it says on the tin. With that said, I stopped using it myself as I felt that my ability to "find the slope intercept form of blankety blank" did not actually translate to any deeper understanding of math than I had before.
I think mathacademy is excellent for developing the skills necessary for solving the problems on mathacademy (which largely are the problems on math exams).
But if your goal is understanding rather than application, then mathacademy is more similar to duolingo than it is to language immersion. You can go quite far in mathacademy (and much of performative mathematics) without really having thought about anything. It is procedure learning rather than understanding.
I have a 2 tier-ed personal response to this question.
For "basic math" up to high school algebra and such, having an intuitive understanding of this lets me quickly do back of the envelope math anytime I hear something that sounds off, or something matches a "pattern" of a type of math I've done before.
Two concrete examples of this are:
- doing drop rate calculations in games (probability)..i.e. I've killed 500 of these, and it is interesting to note that I should've gotten this drop 93% of the time. I'm mathematically unlucky.
- trying to calculate how much it is worth to me to drive at 80mph vs 55mph to get to work, and the relationship between gas prices and my willingness to drive fast (algebra, physics, etc)
For more advanced math, I personally find my high level understanding of the topics enough to appreciate how much goes into everyday things. The algorithms that govern our understanding of radio signals, information theory to pack bits into a given bandwidth and frequency, algorithms and math to ensure what was transitted is what is received, and how hundreds people can be using it at once and still get their data where it needs to go. The amount of math that goes into this all makes me appreciate the beauty of it all.
People who I know who are actually really good at math (and are paid for it) say that there is no shortcut to interest and wrestling/thinking about the problems. You have to mule over things. You have to pack and unpack it over and over in your head.
If I had to put it in a phrase, it would be, "there is no shortcut to understanding without thinking".
Isn't this more or less true of the whole undergraduate college calc syllabus? Like, I had the same thought grinding on trig integrals: "these problems seem super artificial", and I gather they basically are, and I guess closed-form solutions to arbitrary random integrals all sort of are? But that's not Math Academy's doing, or any kind of "teach to the test"; I went through these same problems with both my kids as they did STEM degrees at Illinois, and that's the actual material.
Mathacademy is meeting a market demand, which mostly seems to be being good enough to solve problems in several standardized math courses. In that regard, I think it is a thing that I would prescribe to any student (along with tutoring and study groups) in order to do well in that course.
But I am just not convinced it can ever (especially, in isolation, which you never claimed) lead to you being a good mathematician in the sense of having internalized the material. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I think it is similar to the feeling you get when you are some high level in duolingo and realize you still can't follow daytime soaps. You have the rigid intelligence, but not the fluid (internalized?) one.
Oh, I have no idea if it can help make someone a mathematician. But that's not why engineers study math, right? It's still extremely valuable to be able to do, and to an operational extent understand, advanced math.
I disagree with this take though I've seen the same criticism online a lot before I signed up. I found myself understanding stuff the more I did it. And MathAcademy makes you do a lot of problems on repeat. I also used gpt for stuff MathAcademy didn't explain well.
But the platform does have its issues. I should probably do a writeup someday.
Maybe the trick is taking the question and writing lecture notes / delivering the explanation as a teacher. Surely explaining it is much better than just solving the question and tap tap tap.
I'm probably just behind the curve, but I still use plan mode quite a bit in Claude Code. I iterate on the plan repeatedly until it largely agrees with what I want. Once it seems good I ask it to build the plan and open a PR when done.
My only critic of the plan mode is I wish it was easier to see the updates and changes easily in Claude Code as we iterate on the plan. It is wasteful to have to remember what parts I have reviewed and what parts are new (and need another pass). I have thought about fixing this but I also feel the review is the actual thinking (even if ineficient), and so I purposely have not removed it.
This is not them standing up for the small guy, this is them seeing their actual profit center in retail (advertisement and paid promotion) evaporating if human beings never view their listings.
It's worse than that, they will block all agents and specifically make exceptions for maybe 2 search engines per country. Thereby strengthening existing players and weakening all incumbants.
Cloudflare for instance does allow indexing by Google and Bing I think by default, but does challenge other bots. Double check me I am speaking from memory.
My main problem with PE is that it is being invested in by things that I do not consider "investors" like retirement funds, teacher's pensions, annuities, etc. Many of these things have sort of implicit guarantees from the State or Federal government. These organizations should be completely banned from investing in PE. PE investments should only be invested in by "investors", and investors understand that their investment may go to zero.
I remember playing this on my Oculus Rift 1 I think. It was such a better game than the other games I'd played in VR that had you put it on my head in a darkened room and told me it was the newest hardware tech I would have believed you.
Just the metaphors and "magnetics" for fiddling and dealing with your gun were so good. The conveyance system was also just so much more intuitive. I think they even seemed to have done something to deal with the very mild nausea I felt with some title.
I wonder if LLM's might be closer to the weight belt in terms of lifting? It is a tool that lets you exceed your unassisted limits. If you kept doing the other things you would be no worse for using it, but if you only train with it I am not sure you would be a very well rounded lifter. The weight belt lets you do a few lifts better, at potentially the cost of being weaker than would be required if you did that left unassisted? Might be a bad metaphor honestly.
Aside (shower thought):
A little of a tangent, but I have always felt that the weight belt is kind of odd in that it has become completely accepted to use one for the deadlift and squat. Like, why did we decide that this one form of brace is acceptable but others enhancements are not "real" weightlifting? Why not an incline plane? Why not a pulley?
I'm not at all arguing for or against the usage of the weight belt. I just find it odd that it has become so accepted; seems curious how we decided to draw the line here and not there.
* Got me a "BearSkin" jacket from youtube's incessant advertisement.
* Signed up for a $250 subscription to "The Daily Beast" when she was watching youtube tv right before bed and probably subscribed when she meant to just view.
* Signed up for Norton Antivirus when she got a gif that looks like a popup that tells you have a virus and it opens to a Subscription Plan on her phone.
None of these things were things she particularly wanted, some she didn't even consent to, but a combination of paid promotion / advertisement / confusion about the UI is basically doing things against her will.
I literally got her Youtube Premium just so she stops seeing all the ads that are feeding on her. It is a problem.
> got her Youtube Premium just so she stops seeing all the ads that are feeding on her
I don't blame you for your solution but it is so sad that we have to basically pay protection money to Google now so that our loved ones don't get scammed and robbed while they are consuming addictive/slop content.
If you think that is bad... Recently I discovered that even a tiny website with moderate textual content basically forces adoption of cloudflare due to incredible (~2k request per second at times) scraping by bots.
It isn't even a shakedown, they are genuinely protecting you from others. But how did we get to the point on the web that this is needed?
I've never done verilog professionally but I did "Digital Design and Computer Architecture, RISC-V Edition: RISC-V Edition" as an exercise 2 years ago.
I would say Verilog is very much NOT a low level language.
Metaphorically, it feels closer to SQL to me. I mean this in that you theoretically tell the system what it should do, and it builds it into the messy real world. However, the reality is that the planner (sql) or linker/placer/router/whatever (verilog) are very good, but you often end up needing to actually fully understand the problem anyway when things don't work in the abstract.
I know there is https://clash-lang.org/ for Verilog design, which sounds a little like what you are talking about (never really looked at it myself).
My argument is that verilog is to FPGAs as assembler is to pdp11s, and C is closer to assembler than Java or prolog. High level languages are easier for programmers, but interestingly, the high level language Haskel readily compiles to FPGA. What's happening here?
I've had a vague thought that I wish grocery stores would kind of standardize their bags (you have to use theirs) and just put a passive RFID in them and make them more expensive, but make them nicer, with maybe specific bags for specific use cases (sturdy for fruits, lining for things that need to stay cold). So it would just be a cost that you pay as part of getting a bag ($3) and you get it fully refunded in when you bring it back.
It would mean you don't have to remember to carry the bag all day (which is fine if you drive, but a pain if you use public transit and have to carry bags everywhere). Just "check one out" if you don't have one, bring them back and they will be reused (and you credited) for returning them (or just reuse them yourself, if you want).
This may partially be driven by my mother, who has like 7 different types of bags that she takes to the local HEB. It is always a little song and dance with the bagger about which things go in which of her bags. These are true first world problems, but it just makes me consider alternatives.
Also, minor, but if the bags were actually "valuable", then it would encourage the homeless who find discarded bags to collect them and return them themselves, which helps with the "visible garbage" problem.
These are idiot thoughts of mine, but I do sometimes wonder about alternatives.
I think mathacademy is excellent for developing the skills necessary for solving the problems on mathacademy (which largely are the problems on math exams).
But if your goal is understanding rather than application, then mathacademy is more similar to duolingo than it is to language immersion. You can go quite far in mathacademy (and much of performative mathematics) without really having thought about anything. It is procedure learning rather than understanding.
reply