You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

JGWeissman comments on Leveling IRL - Less Wrong Discussion

33 Post author: cousin_it 05 August 2011 09:35PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (125)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: JGWeissman 05 August 2011 09:54:39PM 8 points [-]

It would be more useful to describe what abilities one would have at a particular level, than the amount of grinding it takes to achieve it. Being able to solve Euler problems at all might be a useful indicator of being a certain level, but having done a lot of them doesn't seem directly important, and if it teaches certain skills, then we should look at those skills directly.

Comment author: atucker 05 August 2011 10:05:48PM 1 point [-]

I entirely agree with this.

I'd rather take shortcuts to levels of ability rather than grind through them, if shortcuts are available. XP is only useful when there's only one way to get to a higher level. I'm pretty sure that's not true in real life.

Comment author: cousin_it 05 August 2011 11:46:55PM *  0 points [-]

Agree with the general point about grinding, but Project Euler is the best way that I know of to look at the relevant skills directly. I'll be happy to use something else if it works well enough.

Comment author: JGWeissman 05 August 2011 11:52:23PM 0 points [-]

I am not very familiar with Project Euler, so to get an idea of what you are talking about: what skills are you looking at with 50 problems that you can't look at with 5?

Comment author: cousin_it 06 August 2011 12:01:19AM 3 points [-]

The problems have rising difficulty level. You need much more understanding to solve a problem like this than to solve this one.

Comment author: Osmium_Penguin 06 August 2011 05:10:57PM 0 points [-]

(Ooh, I like that first problem. It reframes in all sorts of interesting directions.)

Comment author: JGWeissman 06 August 2011 12:37:28AM 0 points [-]

Ah, the increasing difficulty level makes a difference. Though for purpose of proving skills, it seems you could just skip to the harder ones, even though that may not work well for training.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 August 2011 11:52:10PM 2 points [-]

They are not monotonically harder, and they are not all the same exact skill being tested. So someone who has completed Project Euler problems 1-30 has done more to demonstrate her ability than someone who has only done Project Euler problem 30.

If your level is such that 30 represents your current challenge, then doing 1-29 won't take toooooo much time anyway. And you can still have fun trying to improve on the best solution offered so far for the problem -- there are multiple ways to solve a given Project Euler problem.