<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to Survive Your Algorithms Course</title>
	<atom:link href="http://oracology.net/2010/06/how-to-survive-your-algorithms-course/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://oracology.net/2010/06/how-to-survive-your-algorithms-course/</link>
	<description>Ante litteram &#124;&#124; Scientia vincere tenebras</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 18:09:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: administratador</title>
		<link>http://oracology.net/2010/06/how-to-survive-your-algorithms-course/comment-page-1/#comment-72</link>
		<dc:creator>administratador</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oracology.net/?p=533#comment-72</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LOL! Thanks for the link Kip!

They keep telling us that there is no standard (set of) approach(es) to doing proofs, but I think it truly is biased towards the person marking or reviewing your work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LOL! Thanks for the link Kip!</p>
<p>They keep telling us that there is no standard (set of) approach(es) to doing proofs, but I think it truly is biased towards the person marking or reviewing your work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kip</title>
		<link>http://oracology.net/2010/06/how-to-survive-your-algorithms-course/comment-page-1/#comment-69</link>
		<dc:creator>Kip</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:41:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oracology.net/?p=533#comment-69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My sentiments precisely. It didn&#039;t occur to me until after Shitrice that, as you say, no one knows how do to proofs correctly because there is no standard step by step approach to do them in the first place - like balancing a system of linear equations. I seriously wonder if whoever is able to come up with the most cryptic, esoteric, chicken scratch, is the one to get validated in the end.

This gives credence: http://www.naturalnews.com/007318_bad_science_counterthink.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My sentiments precisely. It didn&#8217;t occur to me until after Shitrice that, as you say, no one knows how do to proofs correctly because there is no standard step by step approach to do them in the first place &#8211; like balancing a system of linear equations. I seriously wonder if whoever is able to come up with the most cryptic, esoteric, chicken scratch, is the one to get validated in the end.</p>
<p>This gives credence: <a href="http://www.naturalnews.com/007318_bad_science_counterthink.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.naturalnews.com/007318_bad_science_counterthink.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
