Hi All, Joel Spolsky, of Fog Creek Software, and several of his cohorts have created a great "automatic FAQ" site called StackOverflow (http:// stackoverflow.com/). I've found if very useful for getting software engineering related questions answered. The StackOverflow team has been trying to make money from the "engine" that runs their site. Initially they were asking people to pay for hosting the various different offerings. This isn't working either monetarily or towards their stated goal: "Make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions.", so they've decided to go with a more community-based model. You can read about the rationale here: http://blog.stackexchange.com/post/518474918/stack-exchange-2-0 They are currently soliciting proposals for other stack exchange topics, and I've just posted a proposal for a signal processing one here: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5773/proposal-for-a-signal-processing-se-signal-exchange I see this site as being a way to capture some of the DSP FAQs that we frequently see asked here. I do not see this site as being a replacement for comp.dsp, more as an addendum or as complementary to it. If you're interested (or not!), please post follow-ups to my posting and we'll see how things go. If you like the idea, please up-vote it. If you don't, please discuss why not! Thanks, Peter K.
Proposal for a Signal Processing Stack Exchange
Started by ●April 20, 2010
Reply by ●April 21, 20102010-04-21
On 21 apr, 03:16, "Peter K." <koots...@gmail.com> wrote:> If you're interested (or not!), please post follow-ups to my posting > and we'll see how things go. > > If you like the idea, please up-vote it. �If you don't, please discuss > why not!As I see this kind of thing - years after it has been put in place - it becomes a Q&A lookup where people look up a question, get the solution, and never need to understand the rationale behind that answer to that question. The way comp.dsp and other tutoring situations work, is that somebody come here with an unclear or ill-posed question, are made aware by the regulars that the question is ill-posed, and a dialogue is then initiated to find out what question should *really* be asked. This dialogue with the interested student is the interesting part, both here and in the tutoring work I have done in the past. If that kind of Q&A database were in place, it would likely kill off comp.dsp as a technical forum: People look up the Q&A database first to find an answer they don't understand to a question they should never have asked, and come here to get the mess sorted out. Not a place anyone, either students or experts, would want to hang out for any length of time. My vote is 'against'. DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about understanding what question to ask. Once you know what question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway. Rune
Reply by ●April 21, 20102010-04-21
On 4/21/2010 5:34 AM, Rune Allnor wrote:> On 21 apr, 03:16, "Peter K."<koots...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you're interested (or not!), please post follow-ups to my posting >> and we'll see how things go. >> >> If you like the idea, please up-vote it. If you don't, please discuss >> why not! > > As I see this kind of thing - years after it has been put in > place - it becomes a Q&A lookup where people look up a question, > get the solution, and never need to understand the rationale > behind that answer to that question. > > The way comp.dsp and other tutoring situations work, is that > somebody come here with an unclear or ill-posed question, are > made aware by the regulars that the question is ill-posed, > and a dialogue is then initiated to find out what question > should *really* be asked. > > This dialogue with the interested student is the interesting > part, both here and in the tutoring work I have done in the > past. > > If that kind of Q&A database were in place, it would likely > kill off comp.dsp as a technical forum: People look up the > Q&A database first to find an answer they don't understand > to a question they should never have asked, and come here to > get the mess sorted out. Not a place anyone, either students > or experts, would want to hang out for any length of time. > > My vote is 'against'. > > DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about > understanding what question to ask. Once you know what > question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway.You might be right. I have to say that it soesn't much appeal to me, but I've been wrong before and I would give it a chance. Do you remember the negative views -- mine included -- that were expressed when DSPRelated was launched? Jerry -- "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." Thomas Jefferson to the Virginia House of Delegates in 1776. ���������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●April 21, 20102010-04-21
On 21 apr, 18:09, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> Do you remember the > negative views -- mine included -- that were expressed when DSPRelated > was launched?Nope. I suspect that was before I started frequenting comp.dsp. Rune
Reply by ●April 21, 20102010-04-21
>On 21 apr, 03:16, "Peter K." <koots...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you're interested (or not!), please post follow-ups to my posting >> and we'll see how things go. >> >> If you like the idea, please up-vote it. =A0If you don't, pleasediscuss>> why not! > >As I see this kind of thing - years after it has been put in >place - it becomes a Q&A lookup where people look up a question, >get the solution, and never need to understand the rationale >behind that answer to that question. > >The way comp.dsp and other tutoring situations work, is that >somebody come here with an unclear or ill-posed question, are >made aware by the regulars that the question is ill-posed, >and a dialogue is then initiated to find out what question >should *really* be asked. > >This dialogue with the interested student is the interesting >part, both here and in the tutoring work I have done in the >past. > >If that kind of Q&A database were in place, it would likely >kill off comp.dsp as a technical forum: People look up the >Q&A database first to find an answer they don't understand >to a question they should never have asked, and come here to >get the mess sorted out. Not a place anyone, either students >or experts, would want to hang out for any length of time. > >My vote is 'against'. > >DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about >understanding what question to ask. Once you know what >question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway.I think it depends on the dominant content. If its supposed to be about deep DSP stuff, I think it will tend to trivialise. If its mostly about practical "craft" level stuff that stumps us all from time to time - "Does anyone have example C code that gets the xyz module in a TI TMS1234 to initialise successfully" and so on - it could be a good repository of quick answers to things that can be dreadful time wasters. Steve
Reply by ●April 22, 20102010-04-22
On 22 apr, 03:26, "steveu" <steveu@n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote:> >DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about > >understanding what question to ask. Once you know what > >question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway. > > I think it depends on the dominant content. If its supposed to be about > deep DSP stuff, I think it will tend to trivialise. If its mostly about > practical "craft" level stuff that stumps us all from time to time - "Does > anyone have example C code that gets the xyz module in a TI TMS1234 to > initialise successfully" and so on - it could be a good repository of quick > answers to things that can be dreadful time wasters.Sure, you are right, although reading Peter's manifesto leaves the impression he thinks in more genric terms. Maybe the tech-details kind of forum would be a more useful idea? Several groups on a per-vendor basis? This is the kind of thing that vendors *ought* to host themselves, but which may or may not be up to the levels users might want. Maybe some user-driven technology-specific groups might be more useful? Rune
Reply by ●April 23, 20102010-04-23
Hi Rune, Thanks for the thoughtful response! Some comments below. On 21 Apr, 02:34, Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:> As I see this kind of thing - years after it has been put in > place - it becomes a Q&A lookup where people look up a question, > get the solution, and never need to understand the rationale > behind that answer to that question.Yes, I can see that it could degenerate into that... but that's half the point. I don't see it in any real way replacing comp.dsp or dsprelated. More as a kind of auto-FAQ; we've always had trouble maintaining the comp.dsp FAQ. This could be a way to do it automagically.> The way comp.dsp and other tutoring situations work, is that > somebody come here with an unclear or ill-posed question, are > made aware by the regulars that the question is ill-posed, > and a dialogue is then initiated to find out what question > should *really* be asked.Yes, but it gets repetitive when the same chestnuts keep cropping up.> This dialogue with the interested student is the interesting > part, both here and in the tutoring work I have done in the > past.And the dialog is what should stay here. The Stack Overflow family is *not* a discussion forum.> If that kind of Q&A database were in place, it would likely > kill off comp.dsp as a technical forum: People look up the > Q&A database first to find an answer they don't understand > to a question they should never have asked, and come here to > get the mess sorted out. Not a place anyone, either students > or experts, would want to hang out for any length of time.Perhaps. I am inclined to disagree.> My vote is 'against'.Noted! ;-)> DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about > understanding what question to ask. Once you know what > question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway.DSP is also about learning... and remembering the answers. I see that as the role of the stack overflow / exchange proposal. Ciao, Peter K.
Reply by ●April 23, 20102010-04-23
On 21 Apr, 18:26, "steveu" <steveu@n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> wrote:> >On 21 apr, 03:16, "Peter K." <koots...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> If you're interested (or not!), please post follow-ups to my posting > >> and we'll see how things go. > > >> If you like the idea, please up-vote it. =A0If you don't, please > discuss > >> why not! > > >As I see this kind of thing - years after it has been put in > >place - it becomes a Q&A lookup where people look up a question, > >get the solution, and never need to understand the rationale > >behind that answer to that question. > > >The way comp.dsp and other tutoring situations work, is that > >somebody come here with an unclear or ill-posed question, are > >made aware by the regulars that the question is ill-posed, > >and a dialogue is then initiated to find out what question > >should *really* be asked. > > >This dialogue with the interested student is the interesting > >part, both here and in the tutoring work I have done in the > >past. > > >If that kind of Q&A database were in place, it would likely > >kill off comp.dsp as a technical forum: People look up the > >Q&A database first to find an answer they don't understand > >to a question they should never have asked, and come here to > >get the mess sorted out. Not a place anyone, either students > >or experts, would want to hang out for any length of time. > > >My vote is 'against'. > > >DSP is not about having a table full uf answers, but about > >understanding what question to ask. Once you know what > >question to ask, the answer is more or less given anyway. > > I think it depends on the dominant content. If its supposed to be about > deep DSP stuff, I think it will tend to trivialise. If its mostly about > practical "craft" level stuff that stumps us all from time to time - "Does > anyone have example C code that gets the xyz module in a TI TMS1234 to > initialise successfully" and so on - it could be a good repository of quick > answers to things that can be dreadful time wasters.Sounds like a great addition. If you don't mind, I'll update the proposal. Hassle me if you don't like my hijacking the example and I'll remove it from the proposal. Ciao, Peter K.
Reply by ●April 23, 20102010-04-23
On 22 Apr, 04:01, Rune Allnor <all...@tele.ntnu.no> wrote:> > Sure, you are right, although reading Peter's manifesto leaves > the impression he thinks in more genric terms. >I was trying to take a balance between usefulness of a FAQ and size of audience for it. If you read through some of the stuff that Joel S. espouses, having too small an audience is what killed several other SO sites. Stack Overflow works will itself because it's all about software: embedded, enterprise, Java, C, C++, C#, Ruby, PHP, UML, OOA, OOD, project management, etc etc.> Maybe the tech-details kind of forum would be a more useful idea? > Several groups on a per-vendor basis? This is the kind of thing > that vendors *ought* to host themselves, but which may or may not > be up to the levels users might want. Maybe some user-driven > technology-specific groups might be more useful?Again, the size of individual groups would be too small. Appropriate tagging "TI DSP" or "frequency estimation" or "matlab" would allow people with specific interests to narrow down their interests. Ciao, Peter K.
Reply by ●May 5, 20102010-05-05
