
Algorithm to gauge how likely a CEO was ousted or faced pressure to step down - tyrw
https://www.wsj.com/articles/did-the-ceo-actually-get-fired-theres-a-decoder-for-that-1502645422
======
agentgt
A pet peeve I have is when writers particularly journalists use the word
algorithm when they really mean heuristic. I understand the word is slightly
nebulous particularly in the context of real programs.

See an algorithm both in comp sci and cognitive science always gets the same
correct answer but heuristic may or may not be correct and may even produce
different results with the same input.

Thus ML is generally heuristic based.

~~~
setr
afaik an algorithm is literally a logical sequence of steps to produce some
output. Whether the output is correct, or approximately correct, or even
wrong, is irrelevant to the usage of "algorithm".

Which ofc is why we can say an algorithm is incorrect; correctness is not part
of the definition.

~~~
zero_iq
What you are describing might be called a computational method or process.
"Algorithm" has been formalized over the years to have a very well defined
technical definition:

To be considered an algorithm, a method must be:

1\. Finite. It must terminate after a finite number of steps. (The program,
i.e. the expression of the method must also be finite.)

2\. Definite. Each step must be precisely defined, requiring no
'interpretation' or ingenuity on behalf of the executor of the algorithm.

3\. It must take zero or more inputs, and these inputs must be well-defined.

4\. It must produce one or more well-defined outputs.

5\. It must be an "effective method", which (in addition): 5a. Must always
produce a result 5b. The result must always be a correct result 5c. It must
always arrive at a result after a finite number of steps 5d. It must work for
all defined categories of inputs

This is (almost) literally page 1, chapter 1, book 1 of Knuth. Most probably
one of the first things you'll ever be taught on any respectable computer
science course.

Of course, the term is used more vaguely and everyone still knows what we all
mean, but the above is the widely-accepted formal definition.

~~~
adamc
In computer science, but not in general language.

~~~
zero_iq
A point I made myself, and I didn't say otherwise. I also clearly mentioned
that was the _formal_ definition, not a working definition.

In mathematics and computer science that is indeed the proper definition.

And HackerNews is definitely a mathsy/computersciencey sort of a place, so it
might be nice to use the word correctly here.

Out of interest (or is it flippancy?), where do you use the word algorithm,
when not talking about mathematics or computing?

Do you consider a discussion about heuristics vs algorithms (which is what
this thread is above), on a site like Hacker News, to be 'general
language'...? Or would you consider that this might indeed be a suitable
context to comment on their proper formal definitions?

------
yuhong
I have been thinking of Yishan-style CEOs for a while now, including board of
directors doing CEO searches publicly. Anil Dash joked about it:
[https://twitter.com/anildash/status/893153626247626752](https://twitter.com/anildash/status/893153626247626752)

------
dandare
Can someone please explain the verb "to wax" in the sentence "When a release
waxes poetic, it can suggest a CEO quit by choice."?

I have checked several dictionaries but I still do not understand what the
author meant.

~~~
GauntletWizard
"Waxing poetic" is an idiom meaning "talking longwindedly" or "droning on";
"wax" is used to describe talking, but you'll not find it used that way
anywhere else.

~~~
moftz
The moon's phases are referred to as waxing and waning, wax being the same
meaning in both cases: to grow.

------
johnrichardson
Can't read this, it's behind a paywall. Anyone got a link to the full article?

~~~
vqc
you can use this javascript snippet as a bookmarklet:

    
    
      javascript:window.location.href = 'https://www.facebook.com/flx/warn/?u='+location.href
    

and it will let you avoid paywalls

~~~
jeremynixon
Would love to use this, how and where do I set the bookmarklet?

~~~
lordgrenville
Go to the bookmarks manager in your browser and add it the way you'd add a
website, with the JS snippet as URL. Then when you navigate to a WSJ piece,
click on the bookmarklet to open it with the Facebook passthrough link.

