If Kerry says he will relax restrictions on purchasing cheap drugs from Canada, it is good for the American people. If Kerry says that he will impose restrictions on corporations purchasing comparatively cheap labor from Canada , it is bad for the American people. I see a dilemma here.
The problem with the blacksmith analogy is that a blacksmith skills are not transferrable from one domain to another. For example if you forge steel shoes, you cannot use the skill to say cut someone's hair.
If you restrict yourself to think that programming just consists of writing Java/C/C# or whatever code on your favorite platform for your favorite application, then the analogy may hold. But with programming comes something called "domain knowledge". For example good programmers in a telecom/finance domain gets the bigger picture of why they do what they do and how it fits into the architecture.
Eventhough this knowledge may be incidentally gained it is still critical when future technological decisions not involving selecting a language or platform or methodology may be made. For example, I used to work in telecom and many of the senior programmers or managers who grew from the ranks were respected not that much for their programming skills but for the sense of business perspective they bring into the domain.
Another factor, which this metaphor ignores is that blacksmith's may have been obsoleted because any mass production required lots of equipment which increased the cost of entry.
However, as long as technological growth in computers and computing technology follows something close to Moore law, it is still going to be affordable for a programmer to work on the latest applications driven by this growth on a personal computer.
Maybe, what the author is confusing is that loss of jobs and decrease is average salary means that programming is losing its value. That is not true. If you try to think globally and balance the decrease of quality of life of an out of work american to the increase of quality of life of an chinese/indian/russian programmer, you may find that it is not as zero sum as you may be led to believe. Another criticism is even more basic. There is a physical component involved in blacksmith labor in addition to skill which may average out across them. For programming, once you have the resources it is just skill. For example a good programmer may be able to do something twice or thrice as fast as another with the same resources. This may not be the same case for like a blacksmith forging a horseshoe.
Do I see a day when programming is no longer the hot thing ? Yes. Once computing technology growth stagnates and all the potential applications have been explored; real computing becomes extremely costly ; there are advanced expert systems incorporating all domain specific knowlege we know about; and there are no inequities in the world the day would have come.
Till then the cassandras of doom can take a break.
The problem with the blacksmith analogy is that a blacksmith skills are not transferrable from one domain to another. For example if you forge steel shoes, you cannot use the skill to say cut someone's hair.
If you restrict yourself to think that programming just consists of writing Java/C/C# or whatever code on your favorite platform for your favorite application, then the analogy may hold. But with programming comes something called "domain knowledge". For example good programmers in a telecom/finance domain gets the bigger picture of why they do what they do and how it fits into the architecture. Eventhough this knowledge may be incidentally gained it is still critical when future technological decisions not involving selecting a language or platform or methodology may be made. For example, I used to work in telecom and many of the senior programmers or managers who grew from the ranks were respected not that much for their programming skills but for the sense of business perspective they bring into the domain.
Another factor, which this metaphor ignores is that blacksmith's may have been obsoleted because any mass production required lots of equipment which increased the cost of entry. However, as long as technological growth in computers and computing technology follows something close to Moore law, it is still going to be affordable for a programmer to work on the latest applications driven by this growth on a personal computer.
Maybe, what the author is confusing is that loss of jobs and decrease is average salary means that programming is losing its value. That is not true. If you try to think globally and balance the decrease of quality of life of an out of work american to the increase of quality of life of an chinese/indian/russian programmer, you may find that it is not as zero sum as you may be led to believe.
Another criticism is even more basic. There is a physical component involved in blacksmith labor in addition to skill which may average out across them. For programming, once you have the resources it is just skill. For example a good programmer may be able to do something twice or thrice as fast as another with the same resources. This may not be the same case for like a blacksmith forging a horseshoe.
Do I see a day when programming is no longer the hot thing ? Yes. Once computing technology growth stagnates and all the potential applications have been explored; real computing becomes extremely costly ; there are advanced expert systems incorporating all domain specific knowlege we know about; and there are no inequities in the world the day would have come.
Till then the cassandras of doom can take a break.
Aren't there websites which existed prior to the patent filing which hold coding contests (codejams) with prior specified problems, multiple people participating and the fastest correct entry winning?
By starting an ad campaign, Microsoft is doing two things
1) Lending credibility to Linux by making people aware that its an alternative which can be considered.
2) Pointing out the "purported" gaps in Linux, which will be filled more or less by the open source community.
Some students get interested in a subject more because of the way it is taught rather than what is being taught. While the technology optimises what is being taught, it may be difficult to optimise the way.
i have seen products being places sometimes in the article discussion (links to books, websites in which the poster has an incentive to increass traffic). also sometimes questions in "ask slashdot" are obvious unacknowledged self-plugs.
Innovation is a process , Invention is a product.
Atleast that's what I can get from the definitions at dictionary.com (at the end of my post).
The first person to build a mousetrap is an inventor and the anecdotal "builder of a better mousetrap" is an innovator. In a sense most of the software industry is an innovator or problem solver.
Innovation
The act of introducing something new.
Something newly introduced.
Invention
The act or process of inventing: used a technique of her own invention.
A new device, method, or process developed from study and experimentation: the phonograph, an invention attributed to Thomas Edison.
If you think your boss is an idiot probably your boss knows that too or he is just trying to
social engineer you by pretending to be stupid.
Before trusting your and your peers judgement about a boss being stupid or smart first try to evaluate yourself from the eyes of others. Start with your family for instance including your kids, your parents and your colleagues. You will be surprised to find that many of them think you are stupid too.
In real life bosses who are stupid are generally smart and bosses who act smart often are the most stupid people.
dumb pedestrians, drunken drivers, pesky cyclists , people playing loud music on the cars, traffic signals, underage drivers , billboards with pesky advertising , cars with black smoke belching out of them, car theives etc. the roads suck!
first there were no roads. wherever we went they had these roads. now they have concrete roads. whats the point ? they still skid in rain and snow. the cars still run on gasoline. the roads suck
also doesn't matter how wide this roads get. you should get people and stuff i dont like out from the road. my 3 yr old kid should be able to use the road.the roads suck!
The Versioning trick - Incomplete Games
on
Razor Blade Games?
·
· Score: 1
Iam not sure whether a game has to delivered "once for all" to the consumer ie Iam not really sure whether the razor blade analogy really holds. This is like saying with advanced hardware OS'es take longer to develop for the market.
OS growth is incremental with each version doing a bit more than the previous version. Not sure why the gaming industry has to wait "10 years" before releasing something good. Just get people get hooked on the game and gameplay. Do the fancy stuff , character development etc incrementally.
Although my opinion is probably "unslashdotical" campuses are inhabited by people from medicine, arts , social sciences who may have only tertiary interest in computers. Not everyone is enthused by operating systems.
The installed base of software is higher and the learning curve for MS technologies is much smaller for people from a non-technical background. Its much easier for a person majoring in psychology or statistics (although it may be a generalisation) to use Windows and get research software for Windows than depend on Linux.
The gap between thinking and visualization is much smaller for Microsoft products than Linux. For researchers who are busy and dont want to hunt for information or software (dont know what is rpm, what is a kernel) its much easier to use Windows. Also comments like "Windows crashes more often" are heard more often with heavy computer users. For users who just want to use the occasional word processor, browse the occasional web page and work on some specific software MS holds more appeal.
The article is invalid because it correlates an effect with an unscientific cause.
Also interestingly the article does not evaluate the "postive buzz" that text messaging generates. An interesting phenomena in movies today is low-budget, sometimes offbeat films with new stars make a lot of money. (My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Monsoon Wedding, Y tu Mama Tambien). More films are crossing the border from "just art" to commercial. Can we attribute their success precisely to the same "buzz" generated by "wireless messaging"?
According to me the problem is because people are less likely to "trust" anything then ever before today. Most information you need is freely availaible and with a multiplicity of sources (internet, tv, cellphones/sms, personal communication) providing the same content with a different flavour it is hard to escape a negative or positive buzz. All this information has an effect of improving the decisive abilities of moviegoer.
Also it's not only about a "bloke seeing a movie". Information also helps business decisions. So practically the producer of a movie has the all the information about the "target demographic" before producing a movie or a music cd. However I guess information is not being properly used by the producers of movies since instead of asking fundamental questions about "why a movie should appeal" before starting a movie they have started modelling movies on perceived factors like star appeal/graphics/action etc.
Personally the last thing I want to do is go and see a movie being bashed about in the media, fail to enjoy it and get a "i told you so" from my friends.
I went through the article but could not but help noticing that it relied on "anecdotal" and not "scientific" evidence. For example were there any controlled experiments between users and non users of technology ? Were there historical comparisons under different economical conditions ?
People have problems with technology because they dont learn how to use it or what to use it for before using it. For example on getting a cellphone lots of people try to "overuse" them atleast during the initial period because of all the hype about being "always in touch".
Personally I have found that going all electronic has helped me a lot in taking out stress from work relationships. I tend to be free from personal influences and biases and also it helps foster accountability.
Also, it does not mean that I never talk to my
coworkers or boss. Every week we play a new "outdoor game" and discover quite a few unique things about each other.
I think most of the problems described by the author is because of the "i got it so i have to use it" mindset. Get that out of the system. Just because we have a new fancy gizmo does not in itself mean that you have to use it fulltime and get you "high" ASAP.
I read the article so no RTFA replies please and IANAL.
It looks more like tempting a person to commit an activity and may be of questionable legal validity. Moreover if you enticingly share invalid information or have a bad security model you are equally liable.
All this stuff about honeypots and honeytokens seems to be some sort of PSYCHOLOGICAL/SOCIOLOGICAL maneuvuring to solve a technical problem
* Always speaks the truth
* Is open to change if the truth is at a higher level
* Knows that the answer to the question of life is 42
I know its impossible much like perpetual motion. However I know I will feel like a fool once the "impossible" becomes "possible", and then I will be too rich that my denial will be widely accepted as the truth.
In addition to being a shameless plug from some commercial program, the CNET article her insults our collective intelligence by sayin
Source code is the collection of instructions written by people and later translated into "binaries" that computers can understand
Iam not trolling. But I bet there are companies out there who just want to exploit the websites reach by cheaply disguising marketing gimmicks as news-bytes. Now if the same thing was opensource, we could benefit.
Btw, does having a low bug count prove that some OS is more usable?
Slashdot Mirror
You know who calls himself an ASSMAN
A proctologist
---from seinfeld
If Kerry says he will relax restrictions on purchasing cheap drugs from Canada, it is good for the American people. If Kerry says that he will impose restrictions on corporations purchasing comparatively cheap labor from Canada , it is bad for the American people. I see a dilemma here.
The problem with the blacksmith analogy is that a blacksmith skills are not transferrable from one domain to another. For example if you forge steel shoes, you cannot use the skill to say cut someone's hair.
If you restrict yourself to think that programming just consists of writing Java/C/C# or whatever code on your favorite platform for your favorite application, then the analogy may hold. But with programming comes something called "domain knowledge". For example good programmers in a telecom/finance domain gets the bigger picture of why they do what they do and how it fits into the architecture.
Eventhough this knowledge may be incidentally gained it is still critical when future technological decisions not involving selecting a language or platform or methodology may be made. For example, I used to work in telecom and many of the senior programmers or managers who grew from the ranks were respected not that much for their programming skills but for the sense of business perspective they bring into the domain.
Another factor, which this metaphor ignores is that blacksmith's may have been obsoleted because any mass production required lots of equipment which increased the cost of entry.
However, as long as technological growth in computers and computing technology follows something close to Moore law, it is still going to be affordable for a programmer to work on the latest applications driven by this growth on a personal computer.
Maybe, what the author is confusing is that loss of jobs and decrease is average salary means that programming is losing its value. That is not true. If you try to think globally and balance the decrease of quality of life of an out of work american to the increase of quality of life of an chinese/indian/russian programmer, you may find that it is not as zero sum as you may be led to believe. Another criticism is even more basic. There is a physical component involved in blacksmith labor in addition to skill which may average out across them. For programming, once you have the resources it is just skill. For example a good programmer may be able to do something twice or thrice as fast as another with the same resources. This may not be the same case for like a blacksmith forging a horseshoe.
Do I see a day when programming is no longer the hot thing ? Yes. Once computing technology growth stagnates and all the potential applications have been explored; real computing becomes extremely costly ; there are advanced expert systems incorporating all domain specific knowlege we know about; and there are no inequities in the world the day would have come.
Till then the cassandras of doom can take a break.
The problem with the blacksmith analogy is that a blacksmith skills are not transferrable from one domain to another. For example if you forge steel shoes, you cannot use the skill to say cut someone's hair. If you restrict yourself to think that programming just consists of writing Java/C/C# or whatever code on your favorite platform for your favorite application, then the analogy may hold. But with programming comes something called "domain knowledge". For example good programmers in a telecom/finance domain gets the bigger picture of why they do what they do and how it fits into the architecture. Eventhough this knowledge may be incidentally gained it is still critical when future technological decisions not involving selecting a language or platform or methodology may be made. For example, I used to work in telecom and many of the senior programmers or managers who grew from the ranks were respected not that much for their programming skills but for the sense of business perspective they bring into the domain. Another factor, which this metaphor ignores is that blacksmith's may have been obsoleted because any mass production required lots of equipment which increased the cost of entry. However, as long as technological growth in computers and computing technology follows something close to Moore law, it is still going to be affordable for a programmer to work on the latest applications driven by this growth on a personal computer. Maybe, what the author is confusing is that loss of jobs and decrease is average salary means that programming is losing its value. That is not true. If you try to think globally and balance the decrease of quality of life of an out of work american to the increase of quality of life of an chinese/indian/russian programmer, you may find that it is not as zero sum as you may be led to believe. Another criticism is even more basic. There is a physical component involved in blacksmith labor in addition to skill which may average out across them. For programming, once you have the resources it is just skill. For example a good programmer may be able to do something twice or thrice as fast as another with the same resources. This may not be the same case for like a blacksmith forging a horseshoe. Do I see a day when programming is no longer the hot thing ? Yes. Once computing technology growth stagnates and all the potential applications have been explored; real computing becomes extremely costly ; there are advanced expert systems incorporating all domain specific knowlege we know about; and there are no inequities in the world the day would have come. Till then the cassandras of doom can take a break.
Aren't there websites which existed prior to the patent filing which hold coding contests (codejams) with prior specified problems, multiple people participating and the fastest correct entry winning?
By starting an ad campaign, Microsoft is doing two things 1) Lending credibility to Linux by making people aware that its an alternative which can be considered. 2) Pointing out the "purported" gaps in Linux, which will be filled more or less by the open source community.
until i realised that all i need is a headphone and some music to ignore others...
Some students get interested in a subject more because of the way it is taught rather than what is being taught. While the technology optimises what is being taught, it may be difficult to optimise the way.
i have seen products being places sometimes in the article discussion (links to books, websites in which the poster has an incentive to increass traffic). also sometimes questions in "ask slashdot" are obvious unacknowledged self-plugs.
Innovation is a process , Invention is a product .
The first person to build a mousetrap is an inventor and the anecdotal "builder of a better mousetrap" is an innovator.Atleast that's what I can get from the definitions at dictionary.com (at the end of my post).
In a sense most of the software industry is an innovator or problem solver.
Innovation
The act of introducing something new.
Something newly introduced.
Invention
The act or process of inventing: used a technique of her own invention.
A new device, method, or process developed from study and experimentation: the phonograph, an invention attributed to Thomas Edison.
that the harvard prof who says "collecting data .." is called GATES!
If you think your boss is an idiot probably your boss knows that too or he is just trying to social engineer you by pretending to be stupid.
Before trusting your and your peers judgement about a boss being stupid or smart first try to evaluate yourself from the eyes of others. Start with your family for instance including your kids, your parents and your colleagues. You will be surprised to find that many of them think you are stupid too.
In real life bosses who are stupid are generally smart and bosses who act smart often are the most stupid people.
dumb pedestrians, drunken drivers, pesky cyclists , people playing loud music on the cars, traffic signals, underage drivers , billboards with pesky advertising , cars with black smoke belching out of them, car theives etc. the roads suck!
first there were no roads. wherever we went they had these roads. now they have concrete roads. whats the point ? they still skid in rain and snow. the cars still run on gasoline. the roads suck
also doesn't matter how wide this roads get. you should get people and stuff i dont like out from the road. my 3 yr old kid should be able to use the road.the roads suck!
Iam not sure whether a game has to delivered "once for all" to the consumer ie Iam not really sure whether the razor blade analogy really holds. This is like saying with advanced hardware OS'es take longer to develop for the market.
OS growth is incremental with each version doing a bit more than the previous version. Not sure why the gaming industry has to wait "10 years" before releasing something good. Just get people get hooked on the game and gameplay. Do the fancy stuff , character development etc incrementally.
Although my opinion is probably "unslashdotical" campuses are inhabited by people from medicine, arts , social sciences who may have only tertiary interest in computers. Not everyone is enthused by operating systems.
:)
The installed base of software is higher and the learning curve for MS technologies is much smaller for people from a non-technical background. Its much easier for a person majoring in psychology or statistics (although it may be a generalisation) to use Windows and get research software for Windows than depend on Linux.
The gap between thinking and visualization is much smaller for Microsoft products than Linux. For researchers who are busy and dont want to hunt for information or software (dont know what is rpm, what is a kernel) its much easier to use Windows. Also comments like "Windows crashes more often" are heard more often with heavy computer users. For users who just want to use the occasional word processor, browse the occasional web page and work on some specific software MS holds more appeal.
Go on Mod me down
The article is invalid because it correlates an effect with an unscientific cause.
Also interestingly the article does not evaluate the "postive buzz" that text messaging generates. An interesting phenomena in movies today is low-budget, sometimes offbeat films with new stars make a lot of money. (My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Monsoon Wedding, Y tu Mama Tambien). More films are crossing the border from "just art" to commercial. Can we attribute their success precisely to the same "buzz" generated by "wireless messaging"?
According to me the problem is because people are less likely to "trust" anything then ever before today. Most information you need is freely availaible and with a multiplicity of sources (internet, tv, cellphones/sms, personal communication) providing the same content with a different flavour it is hard to escape a negative or positive buzz. All this information has an effect of improving the decisive abilities of moviegoer.
Also it's not only about a "bloke seeing a movie". Information also helps business decisions. So practically the producer of a movie has the all the information about the "target demographic" before producing a movie or a music cd. However I guess information is not being properly used by the producers of movies since instead of asking fundamental questions about "why a movie should appeal" before starting a movie they have started modelling movies on perceived factors like star appeal/graphics/action etc.
Personally the last thing I want to do is go and see a movie being bashed about in the media, fail to enjoy it and get a "i told you so" from my friends.
Occum's Razor?? Dude close that porn window...
I went through the article but could not but help noticing that it relied on "anecdotal" and not "scientific" evidence. For example were there any controlled experiments between users and non users of technology ? Were there historical comparisons under different economical conditions ?
People have problems with technology because they dont learn how to use it or what to use it for before using it. For example on getting a cellphone lots of people try to "overuse" them atleast during the initial period because of all the hype about being "always in touch".
Personally I have found that going all electronic has helped me a lot in taking out stress from work relationships. I tend to be free from personal influences and biases and also it helps foster accountability.
Also, it does not mean that I never talk to my coworkers or boss. Every week we play a new "outdoor game" and discover quite a few unique things about each other.
I think most of the problems described by the author is because of the "i got it so i have to use it" mindset. Get that out of the system. Just because we have a new fancy gizmo does not in itself mean that you have to use it fulltime and get you "high" ASAP.
Man. Patent this STUFF.
I read the article so no RTFA replies please and IANAL.
It looks more like tempting a person to commit an activity and may be of questionable legal validity. Moreover if you enticingly share invalid information or have a bad security model you are equally liable.
All this stuff about honeypots and honeytokens seems to be some sort of PSYCHOLOGICAL/SOCIOLOGICAL maneuvuring to solve a technical problem
* Always speaks the truth
* Is open to change if the truth is at a higher level
* Knows that the answer to the question of life is 42
I know its impossible much like perpetual motion. However I know I will feel like a fool once the "impossible" becomes "possible", and then I will be too rich that my denial will be widely accepted as the truth.
In addition to being a shameless plug from
some commercial program, the CNET article
her insults our collective intelligence by
sayin
Source code is the collection of instructions written by people and later translated
into "binaries" that computers can understand
Iam not trolling. But I bet there are
companies out there who just want to exploit
the websites reach by cheaply disguising
marketing gimmicks as news-bytes. Now if the
same thing was opensource, we could benefit.
Btw, does having a low bug count prove that
some OS is more usable?
And the shelters don't cave We will "standardise" it into XML And send Osama to his grave!
There is a big .NET ad right in the middle of the article title ..Is that the way its supposed to be ????
Some EntWives for TreeBeard !