And any sufficiently complicated Prolog program contains an ad-hoc, informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of Minesweeper.
And minesweeper is really just an ad-hoc, broken implementation of some form of Conway's Game Of Life. And thus the circle is complete. Turing-complete.
Actually, changing clippy into a scantily clad young lady crawling around on the hood of an expensive powerful car while doing absolutely nothing useful would:
a) Not actually change the functionality of clippy.
b) Probably appeal to quite a lot of the younger "R&B" demographic. Including girls. Though I can't for the life of me understand why.
Now get off my lawn.
Yeah, fuck that. If God wanted underscores, then he should have put it in a better place. CamelCase is fine, and it doesn't require awkward hand positions. Deal with it.
Some of us have to deal with even more absurd keyboard layouts every day, you insensitive clod.
The trouble with domain-specific languages is that they are Turing complete. This is a fatal trap: your hammer may be a great hammer, but if it's Turing-complete you will (this is a law of the universe) one day be forced to use it as a screwdriver, spanner, soda siphon, and nail.
Just this weekend I was thinking of the following reformulation of that classic:
"If all you have is a hammer, you might be really good at turning problems into nails."
"the template system started turning into an ugly programming language" - ah, any sufficiently complex system eventually evolves to contain a limited, broken version of Common Lisp.
Stop delaying the inevitable!
. If they want to "license" us a copy of the game, then we should be able to exchange media when ours is scratched by our kids playing frisbee. We should also be able to get a replacement if we break the disc. Currently, you're mostly shit outta luck with respect to the latter (and the former, but it varies by publisher.)
Adding some things to your list:
You should be able to get a copy for each and every system you own, though you can use only one at a time. You can even install copies on other people's machines.
You should be able to resell your license, though you will then (obviously) lose the ability to use the software.
It's not exactly free (as in libre), but it sure beats the hell out of the having-their-cake-and-eating-it model that game developers seem to be trying to shove down our throats recently. I've been using software with this licensing for years. Sure, it uses a dongle (it's your "ignition key" of sorts), and if you lose that *dongle* your license is gone - but they will replace it if it breaks.
Does anybody have any idea what suddenly possessed Hawaii to freak out about that 'internet' thing that those hackers and terrorists are using?
Has the state been chosen as a soft target in which to pass model legislation by some sinister entertainment industry and/or surveillance state interest group? Is some two-bit local senator trying to weather a 'caught-with-2.5-prostitutes-in-a-blood-soaked-bed' scandal? Are radical Hawaiian nativists waging a guerrilla war to re-establish the monarchy? WTF?
They are just pissed that "surfing" no longer means what it used to mean, and they are trying to take it back.
Professional programmers have a record of being utterly bad at getting proper specifications that turn user desires into working code.
Yeah, they are absolutely the worst. Except for everyone else that has tried, that is.
Look, users are REALLY good at wanting stuff. Lots of stuff. Ideally totally brand-new stuff that's "obvious", and "easy", and "how long could it possibly take to do that, look at the iPad!".
Professional programmers are the poor sods that have to tell them that Facebook actually has over a thousand employees and Apple's market capitalization is pretty close to Belgium's GNP, so the €100 they are willing to pony up for their shiny new thing just isn't going to cover costs.
And if you get past that stage, you start to hound them to actually tell you exactly what they want (in the vain hope that you can figure out what they actually *need* in that giant pile of shiny), and the customer starts telling you that they don't actually have time to tell you, it's YOUR job to figure it out.
So that makes it really obvious. The next big advancement in software development is going to be the mind-reader.
Now get off my lawn.
Seriously, I know what you mean, but your original post puts WAY too much of the blame on the programmers. Guess what I am:)
When it comes to useful communication, talking is usually one of the most inefficient and ineffective ways to get real work done.
You don't talk to get work done. You talk to decide which work needs to be done. Most tech people just don't like talking. Having meetings with a bunch of people that don't like talking is great! All of them cut through the chit-chat and crap like a hot knife through butter. The decision is made quickly, and everyone's off again to do real work.
They're the ones who sit in meetings or phone calls all day "planning" or "discussing strategy" or otherwise not doing anything useful.
Doing the wrong thing very efficiently is not effective though - you have to spend SOME time planning and strategising.
And why is Paul Allen so interested in the Coelacanth? Because its existance might teach us something about how an ancient, unchanging, unadapting entity can yet survive deep below the surface while all its peers have evolved or perished. This research can then be used to help Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
You think you're so funny, but loitering in chopin complexes is no joke
It's not very high on my lizst.
And any sufficiently complicated Prolog program contains an ad-hoc, informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of Minesweeper.
And minesweeper is really just an ad-hoc, broken implementation of some form of Conway's Game Of Life. And thus the circle is complete. Turing-complete.
Actually, changing clippy into a scantily clad young lady crawling around on the hood of an expensive powerful car while doing absolutely nothing useful would:
a) Not actually change the functionality of clippy.
b) Probably appeal to quite a lot of the younger "R&B" demographic. Including girls. Though I can't for the life of me understand why.
Now get off my lawn.
That instantly makes me think of UMIST. Okay, not offensive, but the source of many a lame joke.
Yeah, fuck that. If God wanted underscores, then he should have put it in a better place. CamelCase is fine, and it doesn't require awkward hand positions. Deal with it.
Some of us have to deal with even more absurd keyboard layouts every day, you insensitive clod.
Python uses 'None'.
Typical for slashdot. A whole thread arguing about nothing.
The trouble with domain-specific languages is that they are Turing complete. This is a fatal trap: your hammer may be a great hammer, but if it's Turing-complete you will (this is a law of the universe) one day be forced to use it as a screwdriver, spanner, soda siphon, and nail.
Just this weekend I was thinking of the following reformulation of that classic:
"If all you have is a hammer, you might be really good at turning problems into nails."
then we will all become Borg!
You have beautiful eyes, baby. Where did you buy them?
"the template system started turning into an ugly programming language" - ah, any sufficiently complex system eventually evolves to contain a limited, broken version of Common Lisp.
Stop delaying the inevitable!
No, standard Christianity is every bit as weird as Mormonism. People have just grown up around it, so it gets a pass.
Which one is standard Christianity exactly?
. If they want to "license" us a copy of the game, then we should be able to exchange media when ours is scratched by our kids playing frisbee. We should also be able to get a replacement if we break the disc. Currently, you're mostly shit outta luck with respect to the latter (and the former, but it varies by publisher.)
Adding some things to your list:
It's not exactly free (as in libre), but it sure beats the hell out of the having-their-cake-and-eating-it model that game developers seem to be trying to shove down our throats recently. I've been using software with this licensing for years. Sure, it uses a dongle (it's your "ignition key" of sorts), and if you lose that *dongle* your license is gone - but they will replace it if it breaks.
Does anybody have any idea what suddenly possessed Hawaii to freak out about that 'internet' thing that those hackers and terrorists are using? Has the state been chosen as a soft target in which to pass model legislation by some sinister entertainment industry and/or surveillance state interest group? Is some two-bit local senator trying to weather a 'caught-with-2.5-prostitutes-in-a-blood-soaked-bed' scandal? Are radical Hawaiian nativists waging a guerrilla war to re-establish the monarchy? WTF?
They are just pissed that "surfing" no longer means what it used to mean, and they are trying to take it back.
There's a data off setting on my girlfriends iPhone. It's easy to find. It's the first thing she turned off when she first turned *on* the phone.
Unless you've personally verified every single line of code in the OS, you're not really better off.
Even if you do, you're not sure. Your compiler may be compromised. See: Reflections on trusting trust.
720 degrees is 4 Pi in radials
*waits for inevitable whoosh*
I hear that "Captain Obvious" will be an XBox Exclusive :)
I'm holding out for the XBox 4 PI. I like pi. It's tasty.
Like Tolkien wrote years ago: Ash NaCl durbatulûk, ash NaCl gimbatul, Ash NaCl thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatulgoogle.
Sensible people, on the other hand, see sandboxing as just one more tool in the toolbox.
So please enlighten us. How do you run untrusted code on your machine without some kind of sandbox?
Root someone else's machine and run it there.
And here I thought the Dutch would have the national pride not to make their network security like Swiss Cheese.
There's no way to tell sarcasm and apple fanboyism apart.
There's an app for that!
Professional programmers have a record of being utterly bad at getting proper specifications that turn user desires into working code.
Yeah, they are absolutely the worst. Except for everyone else that has tried, that is.
:)
Look, users are REALLY good at wanting stuff. Lots of stuff. Ideally totally brand-new stuff that's "obvious", and "easy", and "how long could it possibly take to do that, look at the iPad!".
Professional programmers are the poor sods that have to tell them that Facebook actually has over a thousand employees and Apple's market capitalization is pretty close to Belgium's GNP, so the €100 they are willing to pony up for their shiny new thing just isn't going to cover costs.
And if you get past that stage, you start to hound them to actually tell you exactly what they want (in the vain hope that you can figure out what they actually *need* in that giant pile of shiny), and the customer starts telling you that they don't actually have time to tell you, it's YOUR job to figure it out.
So that makes it really obvious. The next big advancement in software development is going to be the mind-reader.
Now get off my lawn.
Seriously, I know what you mean, but your original post puts WAY too much of the blame on the programmers. Guess what I am
Did the dot com boom teach us nothing?
That you can get rich if you can get in and out in time.
When it comes to useful communication, talking is usually one of the most inefficient and ineffective ways to get real work done.
You don't talk to get work done. You talk to decide which work needs to be done. Most tech people just don't like talking. Having meetings with a bunch of people that don't like talking is great! All of them cut through the chit-chat and crap like a hot knife through butter. The decision is made quickly, and everyone's off again to do real work.
They're the ones who sit in meetings or phone calls all day "planning" or "discussing strategy" or otherwise not doing anything useful.
Doing the wrong thing very efficiently is not effective though - you have to spend SOME time planning and strategising.
And why is Paul Allen so interested in the Coelacanth? Because its existance might teach us something about how an ancient, unchanging, unadapting entity can yet survive deep below the surface while all its peers have evolved or perished. This research can then be used to help Microsoft.
How log will it take?
How log is a piece of strig?
Thab debebs ob webber you hab a bab colb or nob.