Guy Kawasaki 10-20-30 Presentation Rule

It's a juvenile argument to trash everything because you don't agree with the definition of one word.

It was also positioned to be humorous: most humans laugh at this point. For me the humour is using an algorithm based on people to determine the font size. It's incongruous and funny. When you are being humorous, you are allowed to exaggerate or be incorrect for effect.

He's not incorrect: it falls into the definition of algorithm, according to the Oxford English Dictionary.

He and you don't understand that algorithms are colloquially meant to be a series of processes that get a job done. If you classify mathematical functions as processes, of course it makes sense! But I'll bet the audience only found it humorous because they don't know the difference between an algorithm and a formula. I find it intellectually insulting when someone's teaching and can't even get his words straight.

So, you're gonna get all your subscribers and friends to "thumbs down" me too?

Technically he's correct, an algorithm is an implementation of a function:

f(x) = 2^x

can be implemented/computed as:
function f (x)
result = 1
for (i=1 to x) result = result * 2
return result

You're also being juvenile for reviving a half-month old comment.

You don't understand what an algorithm is

algorithm

/al-guh-ri-th'm/ noun a process or set of rules used in calculations or other problem-solving operations.

There's no time limit on comments.

Had Kawasaki said formula instead of algorithm, which he does on occasion, it's still funny.

Look, if pseudo-intellectualism, technological inexperience and technically incorrect quips impress women, they probably weren't my type in the first place.

Just because something sounds intelligent to you and you're too oblivious to understand how he's wrong doesn't make my statements less valid.

I'm not nitpicking because out of insecurity. I'm nitpicking because these things are cracks in the man's educational foundation which his advice is supposed to stand upon.

Meant "quadratic formula" not "quadratic equation"

Sorry radicalgarbage02, we got absolutely no value out of your comments. Better if you never posted them.

You're welcome, you bandwagoner, you ^_^

If you want to convert mathematical processes into procedures, you can even make algebraic equations like the quadratic equation into an algorithm but that doesn't make it known henceforth to everyone as the "quadratic algorithm" now does it?

I don't understand why every time a nobody like me disagrees with someone more "successful", people like you will follow like a herd of sheep without any thought towards the actual content of the comment.

Way to be open minded and unbiased.... *sarcasm*