I don’t find much use in defining conceptual pathfinding as local information bootstrapping since you mentioned only the scale of the challenge is different. What I often experience is that studying one concept always lead to me studying another concept since it depends on other concepts. This means that I am going to end up deriving all of calculus as long as I have the time and will. And that implies that given enough time and will, a single conceptual pathfinding turns into a global information bootstrapping (a very holistic understanding).
Basically, what I found useful about this post were:
-Your algorithm
-The concept of bootstrapping
What I don’t like:
-Pointless categorization
-Algorithm does not state how to manage the information that will come out of information bootstrapping.
You honestly expressed your own experience, including disagreement, in enough depth to promote a discussion
What I didn’t like:
Sharp tone (“pointless” categorization)
Complaining (“Algorithm does not state how to manage the information that will come out of information bootstrapping,” “I don’t think there is any real difference between “conceptual pathfinding” and “information/material bootstrapping”)
I don’t find much use in defining conceptual pathfinding as local information bootstrapping since you mentioned only the scale of the challenge is different. What I often experience is that studying one concept always lead to me studying another concept since it depends on other concepts. This means that I am going to end up deriving all of calculus as long as I have the time and will. And that implies that given enough time and will, a single conceptual pathfinding turns into a global information bootstrapping (a very holistic understanding).
Basically, what I found useful about this post were:
-Your algorithm
-The concept of bootstrapping
What I don’t like:
-Pointless categorization
-Algorithm does not state how to manage the information that will come out of information bootstrapping.
Thanks for the feedback, Duck Duck.
What I liked about your comments:
You clearly read and thought about my post
You honestly expressed your own experience, including disagreement, in enough depth to promote a discussion
What I didn’t like:
Sharp tone (“pointless” categorization)
Complaining (“Algorithm does not state how to manage the information that will come out of information bootstrapping,” “I don’t think there is any real difference between “conceptual pathfinding” and “information/material bootstrapping”)