top | item 28186771 (no title) gsg | 4 years ago This works until the analogue of monotremes shows up to ruin your supposedly flawless categorisation. discuss order hn newest nfw2|4 years ago I didn't say the categorization was flawless; I said it reduced the complexity of the information. Categories can be useful without being flawless. rmdashrfstar|4 years ago It is not a “can be”, it’s a “must be”. Models or an abstraction of complexity are necessarily both reductionist and useful. gifnamething|4 years ago YAGNI
nfw2|4 years ago I didn't say the categorization was flawless; I said it reduced the complexity of the information. Categories can be useful without being flawless. rmdashrfstar|4 years ago It is not a “can be”, it’s a “must be”. Models or an abstraction of complexity are necessarily both reductionist and useful.
rmdashrfstar|4 years ago It is not a “can be”, it’s a “must be”. Models or an abstraction of complexity are necessarily both reductionist and useful.
nfw2|4 years ago
rmdashrfstar|4 years ago
gifnamething|4 years ago