也是篇研究,講各種職業的離婚率:「Divorce and Occupation」,副標題「Some jobs tend towards higher divorce rates. Some towards lower.」。拿的是 2015 美國的資料分析出來的:

Using data from the 2015 American Community Survey, for each occupation, I calculated the percentage of people who divorced out of those who married at least once.




Flat UI 反而造成使用者困擾

在「Flat UI Elements Attract Less Attention and Cause Uncertainty」這邊透過追蹤眼球的技術,發表了研究結果:

Summary: Flat interfaces often use weak signifiers. In an eyetracking experiment comparing different kinds of clickability clues, UIs with weak signifiers required more user effort than strong ones.

其中最明顯的一個例子就是大家被訓練「有底線的文字應該可以按」,這也是最能馬上被想到的問題... 不過這算是 Flat UI 的問題嗎?

The popularity of flat design in digital interfaces has coincided with a scarcity of signifiers. Many modern UIs have ripped out the perceptible cues that users rely on to understand what is clickable.


看到 Mathcha 這個網站,除了可以輸入 TeX 的公式外,也有 WYSIWYG 的方式輸入,而最後可以輸出成各種格式 (包括 TeX),或是直接丟連結給其他人:

輸入的部份,對於不知道的符號葉可以用畫的 XD

然後網站上的標示寫沒有支援 IE 與 Edge,不知道是真得不支援還是沒列上去而已... XD


是一篇老文章了... (2014 年的文章,最近從其他地方提起)

這邊講的是英文,不過同樣方式也可以拿來分析其他語言:「The distribution of letters in English words」,原始文章在「Graphing the distribution of English letters towards the beginning, middle or end of words」。


The data is from the entire Brown corpus in the Natural Language Toolkit. It's a smaller and out-of-date corpus, but it's open source and easy to obtain. I repeated the analysis with COHA, the Corpus of Historical American English, a well-curated, proprietary data set from Brigham Young University for which I have a license, and the only differences were in rare letters like "z" or "x".


2015 的文章以及演講,最近冒出來看到的。GooglePeter Norvig 提到了用 ML 的方式分析,發現程式競賽的成績與工作品質的負面相關性:「Being good at programming competitions correlates negatively with being good on the job」。

換句話說,程式競賽的成績反而是是個負面指標 (對於 Google 內的情況分析出來的,所以是基於 Google hiring process 的前提過濾過的)。

In this talk, Peter talked about how Google did machine learning and at one point he mentioned that at Google they also applied machine learning to hiring. He said that one thing that was surprising to him was that being a winner at programming contests was a negative factor for performing well on the job.


Peter added that programming contest winners are used to cranking solutions out fast and that you performed better at the job if you were more reflective and went slowly and made sure things were right.

YouTube 的留言處也有一些猜測,像是:

What he's talking about is the fact that several extremely important parts of software engineering are not included in these contests, for example code reusability, maintainability, decomposition of the problem using the OO paradigm, etc. All of these make a good engineer, but are not necessarily needed in competitive programming contests.

CMU 推出 Product Management 的課程

CMUCS (Computer Science) 發的新聞稿:「Carnegie Mellon Offers New Master's Degree in Product Management」。


One-Year Program Turns Computer Professionals Into "CEOs of the Product"

除了 CMU CS 外,也結合了 CMU 的 Tepper Business School 一起開:

A joint program of the university's School of Computer Science (SCS) and Tepper School of Business, the Master of Science in Product Management (MSPM) program will start January 2018.

另外一個不同角度的 Product Management。


Hacker News Daily 上看到的,這是一篇教你怎麼讀論文的論文:「How to Read a Paper」,標注的版本是 Version of February 17, 2016。



如何讓工程師一個禮拜工作 60~80 小時

從「How do you make programmers work 60-80 hours per week?」這邊看到的,出自 Quora 的「How do you make programmers work 60-80 hours per week?」。

看到標題的時候在想「這什麼詐騙集團類型問題 XDDD」,寫 code 的工程師一天可以專注三個小時就很了不起了好嗎,然後年紀愈大就愈難專注。每天可以工作十小時鐵定是一堆時間在看 YouTubeFacebookTwitter 的好嗎 XDDD


No programmers really work 60-80 hours a week, especially in a 5 day span. That is a 12-16 hour day, 5 days a week.

I promise you that any company that has programmers “working” that many hours is really only getting 2-4 hours of real work out of them each day. The rest of the time will be filled with pointless meetings, a fair amount of web browsing, and then a whole lot of looking busy.


AlphaGo 又要重出江湖了

DeepMind 家的 AlphaGo 又要重出江湖了:「Exploring the mysteries of Go with AlphaGo and China's top players」。這次將會跟中國的頂尖職業棋手對弈,裡面提到三種賽制:

The summit will feature a variety of game formats involving AlphaGo and top Chinese players, specifically designed to explore the mysteries of the game together. The games will include:

  • “Pair Go” — A game where one Chinese pro will play against another...except they will both have their own AlphaGo teammate, alternating moves, to take the concept of ‘learning together’ quite literally.
  • “Team Go” — A game between AlphaGo and a five-player team consisting of China’s top pro players, working together to test AlphaGo’s creativity and adaptability to their combined style.
  • “Ke Jie vs AlphaGo” — Of course, the centerpiece of the event will be a classic 1:1 match of three games between AlphaGo and the world’s number one player, Ke Jie, to push AlphaGo to (...perhaps beyond!) its limits.

有傳言是這樣打 (目前大家都抄來抄去...),但目前還沒看到正式的公告:

(一)5月23,25,27日 柯潔與AlphaGo三番棋:每方3小時,5次1分鐘讀秒;
(二)5月26日 時越、羋昱廷、唐韋星、陳耀燁和周睿羊5人團隊賽:每方2小時30分,保留3次1分鐘讀秒;
(三)5月26日 古力、連笑人機配對賽:每方1小時,1次1分鐘讀秒。

另外有一篇「Innovations of AlphaGo」講了不少年初 AlphaGo 連勝六十盤的對局給人類棋手的啟發。

另外 DeepMind 的 CEO,Demis Hassabis 前幾天剛好有給了一個演講,也是講了不少東西 (不過都是之前就提過的):