On 2011-04-06, at 4:56 PM, Leonor Palmeira wrote: > On 06/04/11 22:31, John Nash wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> If you think that this is off-topic, please advise and I will shut up. >> >> >> On 2011-04-06, at 4:08 PM, Robin Kramer wrote: >> >>> Generally I prefer the way they teach in CS, where you implement the >>> algorithm. IE actually program a dynamic alignment algorithm. >>> >>> If you can do that then picking up a new alignment algorithm, isn't too >>> difficult. I find so many people are high centered on a technology because >>> they only know the switches for that particular black box, so they resist >>> even keeping up to date on the latest versions of their favorite software. >>> >>> Sincerely yours, >>> >>> Robin >> >> >> It depends on how you want to look at it. Many of us are doing this because >> we are trying to solve biological problems. We don't really care how (as in >> mechanistically) it works, only that it is accurate in answering my >> biological question. >> >> John > > Just as a note, a piece of software is never intended to solve a "biological" > question but rather a mathematical simplification of the problem through a > specific method. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the mathematical > simplification as well as the key steps of the method in order to determine > if it applies to your specific "biological" question. I don't disagree at all, but my job is still to use tools to answer questions. Yes, I must know how the tools works, or how to drive it, but I do not need to know how to create the tool. I am a very good guitarist, I don't just listen to guitar. I know how a guitar is made, and how it works. Don't ask me to make the guitar. John -- You have received this mail because you are subscribed to the mira_talk mailing list. For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://www.chevreux.org/mira_mailinglists.html