Took me 2 hours to derivate this shit and realize how it works

>t. brainlet

This is shit that took smart people hundreds of years to figure out, and you're trying to learn it in a few hours. OF COURSE it's going to be hard, duh

Yeah, and they let me just pass that shit to get my cash for the second semester. They should really require IQ tests, otherwise you will participate and fail like me, just to get robbed in the end

>If you put some stats into charisma it doesn't even matter.
Finish your degree. I have no idea what that is and I don't care.
>t. Industry software dev.

>otherwise you will participate and fail like me, just to get robbed in the end
I finished calculus III in high school. One of the easiest classes I've ever taken. You're just retarded and blame others for not knowing your own limitations.

What did you derive that from?

Attached: 1496115462091.png (612x491, 98K)

Not really a good argument. It took extremely bright minds to discover these concepts, but understanding it is nowhere near the same as discovering it. I doubt I would've discovered calculus if I were in Leibniz or Newton's place, but I breezed through all of my calc classes in university.

>took me 2 hours
Take solace in the fact that a huge portion of human population would take forever.

Also this:

It's not derived. OP is just retarded. It's an equation for evaluating the error/difference between two sets of linear values. There are other similar equations that emphasize different dissimilarities.

It takes a 16-18 year old around 10-15 minutes getting it explained in a statistics class.
I am not sure why OP is retarded this hard.

This is not deriving? Im more retarded than I thought

Attached: rmse-2 (1).jpg (402x270, 25K)

>STEM
>using math
Relax, if your an engineer you won’t use any of this in your job. At best you’ll use a spreadsheet with some macros built in
>t. BSME with 4 years of work experience

>It takes a 16-18 year old around 10-15 minutes getting it explained in a statistics class.
What race is it though?

BASED

>White.

I saw that because there's nothing to derive. It is a hand picked equation that evaluates a specific kind of error. The entire equation is the definition.

I'm sorry but what 16-18 year olds are these? The majority of 16-18 year olds that I know and remember would have their thumb in their ass trying to figure basic calculus. Your perception is completely skewed, and I guess you've probably forgotten what your classes were actually like too.

>what 16-18 year olds are these
I for one was 15 when I was introduced to MSE in calculus. Seemed like common sense to me.

>I'm sorry but what 16-18 year olds are these?
Those that were bright and being taught these concepts by good teachers.

I was thinking the same. I can read this summation and get what it does without knowing statistics, but then again, what's to derive? The results are apparently meant to be linear already.

Attached: _103242836_c41awk.jpg (660x371, 38K)

Good for you if true, how about all the other 16-18 year olds? You think it's common to understand these concepts in calculus. Most people struggle a lot when first introduced to the concept of differentiation.

So a tiny proportion of all 16-18 year olds.

Believe it or not, I was caught basic concepts in calculus (integral and differential) at 15.

Only people who struggle are those work

Blow off retard, do you honestly believe you're even remotely smart?
I was learning abstract algebra at AP classes in my HS when I was only 13
Get the fuck out of here

Anyone that is average or above would, or rather should understand these sorts of concepts. Especially if you're in STEM.

>abstract algebra at AP classes in my HS when I was only 13
Okay.

I'm not doubting you specifically, I don't really care to challenge individual claims on Jow Forums any more. My point is that regardless of what you claim you did, most other people wouldn't be capable of doing that.
Wrong, I was in a class with a good teacher and all people were 120+ IQ, and many struggled a lot with intro calc.
Yes but people in STEM are an elite minority so it doesn't apply to my point.

Same here user.
Firstly, that's a different user. Second, neither of us are claiming that we're some sort of geniuses. Ironically, you did just that though. Since you want to wave your dick around, I graduated with a college degree before I graduated from high school.

>this thread
Just kill me, I wish we could delete our own OPs. Being a brainlet is hell in a society wheres one worth is decided by education he pursues. Nobody knows my paint of being below mediocrity, you work hard for worse or nill results.

Even basic shit like fourier transform took me while to figure whilst others get it by simply listening during lectures. I mean I know the formula, I l know it here too but I will never truly grasp what makes it work.

Attached: 3a592f43 (1).jpg (1024x582, 69K)

>I mean I know the formula, I l know it here too but I will never truly grasp what makes it work.
That's just how it goes in math classes, where you can do the problems but don't really get it until you see it applied to something.

>fourier transform [...] I will never truly grasp what makes it work
youtube.com/watch?v=spUNpyF58BY

>Even basic shit like fourier transform took me while to figure whilst others get it by simply listening during lectures
Hard work is more important than IQ user. I may make fun of you but I have horrible work ethic. Like really bad. This is mostly due to emotional issues. I have a 4 day weekend and I still haven't done shit.

My point precisely.

Even if I apply something I dont understand them. Take basic derivate and minmax points, how does it work? Fuck if Ill ever know. Same thing here, taking derivative of original post so that we get the minimum and we can use it to draw lines with smallest error between N number of points.

Why does it really do that? Fuck if I know, I cant pull it out from thin air.

Attached: 1566731388759.png (565x797, 609K)

Mathematics is like a tapestry. You see the face of it and you only see that it works but not how it works. You see the back of it and you see how it works but not the result of the work. You have to be introduced to one side first but you can only really get it when you see both.

Some see, some dont.

One might also call it a huge mess of shit covering spiders webs. See on the surface you get a nice, stinky crusty hard outer shell that shields you from the unfathomable tangled mess of spider webs below that support everything.

Now, you might say that what lies below is a paragon of order. I say that much of the lower stuff in mathematics has been cobbled together by 50 different people to help rigorously support higher level mathematics that came before it.

You can on Jow Forums up until a certain time, lad

>It takes a 16-18 year old around 10-15 minutes getting it explained in a statistics class.
It takes a teenager that long to memorize and apply it, understanding why it works is something else entirely.

>Mean Square Error
Just take the mean of the square error

Well, um, I guess that's one way of putting it...

>Even basic shit like fourier transform took me while to figure whilst others get it by simply listening during lectures
unless your professor did a great job explaining it as opposed to just writing the formula and telling people to memorize it, I really doubt that considering how abstract and foreign the concept is when you first see it. I think most people only settle for memorizing the formula/properties and how to compute it by hand, at least by the end of the first course you learn it in
>I will never truly grasp what makes it work
I think it's easiest to think of in terms of correlation. you're just correlating a signal with an impulse in the frequency domain at a particular position. the higher the correlation is, the more stuff you've got at that frequency. the fourier transform just does that while moving the impulse around to different frequencies

He said
>They should really require IQ tests
If you found it easy, congrats, I guess? Some people aren't like you. Get over yourself, virgin.