<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Proposition on CuriousCoding</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/categories/proposition/</link><description>Recent content in Proposition on CuriousCoding</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0200</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://curiouscoding.nl/categories/proposition/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Three log scientist</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/three-log-scientist/</link><pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/three-log-scientist/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;A rating system for theoretical computer scientists.
The more logarithms there are (i.e. the more &amp;ldquo;\(\log\)&amp;rdquo; before your variables),
the higher your reputation will be.
No-log theoretical computer scientists are virtually non-existent, as virtually
all non-trivial algorithms require use of logarithms.
Most are one-log scientists.
In the old times (well, I&amp;rsquo;m young, so these look like old times to me at least), one would occasionally find a piece of code done by a three-log scientist and shiver with awe.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Motivation</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/motivation/</link><pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2022 23:22:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/motivation/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;It&amp;rsquo;s not the need for faster software that motivates; it&amp;rsquo;s the mathematical
discovery that needs sharing.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>RTFE</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/rfte/</link><pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2021 15:16:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/rfte/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Read The F*ing Error&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;When you complain about an error without reading it first.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;When you assume you understand the problem halfway through reading the error,
and only after more debugging you realize you failed to read properly.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;</description></item><item><title>1st law of Procrastination</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/procrastination/</link><pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2021 11:46:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/procrastination/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Important deadlines require important procrastination.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Data should be reviewed</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/data-should-be-reviewed/</link><pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2021 11:41:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/data-should-be-reviewed/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Experiments and their analysis should be reproducible, and all data/figures in a
paper should be reviewable. Pipelines (e.g. &lt;code&gt;snakemake&lt;/code&gt; files) to generated them
should be attached to the paper.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;ve asked for automated scripts to reproduce test data on 3+ github repositories
now, and got a satisfactory answer zero times:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WFA: &lt;a href="https://github.com/smarco/WFA/issues/26" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;https://github.com/smarco/WFA/issues/26&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Link to a datadump on the block-aligner repository. Good to have actual data,
but &lt;em&gt;exactly&lt;/em&gt; how this data was created is unclear to me.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Open Science</title><link>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/open-science/</link><pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0200</pubDate><guid>https://curiouscoding.nl/posts/open-science/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;rsquo;s go over some reasons for why I&amp;rsquo;m writing this blog.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2 id="the-internet-is-more-accessible-than-papers"&gt;
 The internet is more accessible than papers
 &lt;a class="heading-link" href="#the-internet-is-more-accessible-than-papers"&gt;
 &lt;i class="fa-solid fa-link" aria-hidden="true" title="Link to heading"&gt;&lt;/i&gt;
 &lt;span class="sr-only"&gt;Link to heading&lt;/span&gt;
 &lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The inspiration for this blog is the post on &lt;a href="https://alexbowe.com/succinct-debruijn-graphs/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Succinct de Bruijn Graphs&lt;/a&gt; by Alex Bowe.
I think blog posts are a great way to quickly learn about new
ideas and concepts, since they are usually more accessible than papers.
A blog post can omit some of the more formal text required in papers
and spend more time explaining things on an intuitive level. This way,
scientific concepts can be understood by a larger audience than just those
actively working on it.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>