The point is not about the use Lisp, but about knowing when Lisp is appropriate and when not. Engineers must make these choices all the time. Should we build this bridge from iron or wood?
If you are a software engineer people, who pay you, will depend on your judgment to select the right tool for the job, It's your responsibility to know the options.
You're trying too hard to disprove this. The majority of new software these days is in so-called "enterprise applications." In a nutshell, this is stuff that runs on the company intranet or desktop applications that let the user interact with a database.
You are right, that there is software that doesn't need to be scalable and be able to handle tons of transactions.
But very often these applications are much more sophisticated in what they do between the retrieval and store operations.
I worked on a system that never had more than twenty users, but did some pretty fancy processing . This was at an investment bank, and this software enabled us to make a lot of money.
In any case, as a software engineer, you should know which situation you are in. Beware of the case of a Java Applet prototype being rolled out to 10,000 users because someone high up really
liked it.
If you've got the critical thinking part down, just exactly why would you need a classroom to help you filter the wheat from the chaff?
There is a certain amount of background knowledge that's hard to acquire by yourself. I'm not saying that it's not possible, but difficult. It's a lot easier with a guidance from someone else.
For example, now many of these freshly minted self-educated Java programmers know Lisp? How many would even know why Lisp is important?
Did you know what you wanted to build things for a living when you were 8 years old? Did you constantly get in trouble for taking apart your toys? Did you have a burning desire to understand things and build them?
Yep. Even before eight.
I've been coding for money for over 24 years now.:-)
Most software problems are VERY simple. Get info from DB, Present to user, allow input, perform calculation, put info back into DB. This describes 90% of the software solutions out there. This is EASY. If it's hard to you, you're in the wrong industry.
Unfortunately that's what managers who build their prototypes with Access over the weekend think.
The problem becomes more diffcult if you have to find the data in a 100Gig database, while 10,000 other people are trying to do the same thing.
While another 2345 users are trying to update the same records.
Oh, yeah and all the access if over a wide-area network, with the users expecting sub-second response.
Think of credit card verification system. Each transaction is trivially simple - get credit available, subtract payment, store new balance.
Alan Kay once had a nice analogy for this issue. Anybody can build a doghouse. You can get some wood from Home Depot and put a usable doghouse together.
However, the ability to build a doghouse does not qualify you as a builder of sky scrapers. The doghouse methods do not scale up.
Programming is critical thinking, and that can't really be taught in a classroom. You either cultivate it yourself, or you don't.
That's certainly a big part of it.
However, there is a large part of accumulated knowledge that you need to learn to be a proficient software engineer. You can do it on your own, but classroom can provide a clear direction and help filter the stupid stuff from the essential stuff.
Did it hurt your wittle ego to know that someone could teach themselves something that you couldn't even grasp after 4 years at school?
Ha, ha. No.
I'm just tired of having to deal with people who think that building a doghouse (i.e. writing silly programs on their computer) qualifies them to design a skyscraper.
Comparing this to surgery is alittle extreme, don't you think?
Maybe. But I've written code which handles 100 billions (that's 10e9) US dollars everyday. If I screwed up, I can put a big dent in the economy (for example Bank of NY had a nasty failure in the arly 80s that stopped their clearing systems for 2 days, they nearly went out of business - BTW that wasn't my code:-)).
Would you like to have your money handled by someone who learned to code by reading "VB For Dummies"?
WOW, thats laughable. I am sorry, i don't know others experience, but MANY of the degreed cs people i know are way LESS skilled than self taught colleagues.
I guess you are right. I've also seen people with degrees who couldn't code their way out of a paper bag.
However, some formal education is necessary at some point in the life of a sofware engineer. If you are good, at least you should understand why.
Plus, there were many very smart people who came before you and solved the same problems at least once.
I supposed if you are self-taught be reading Knuth and doing all the problems, then it's quite different from reading "VB For Dummies".
I enjoyed a programming "career" for 5 years following high-school. I am self-taught, and managed, developed and implemented databases at an ISP, a TV Broadcast Company, and for a Freight Brokerage.
I'm happy that you found a new career. Please leave building software to people who were trained how to do it. Would you go to a "self-taught" surgeon?
it will not get used!!! The only way for a mail client to spring forth that can truly replace outlook, is to have it have access to all the same information that Outlook does.
For small companies not buying an Exchange server is an option.
You could also build/sell an interface between the Chandler network and an Exchange Server...(a la stuff from Ximian).
I would argue that there are some things that are independent of the "human" part. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 (assuming the usual meaning of these symbols), and no "miracle" or wishful thinking will make it otherwise. This is true for humans as well as aliens from planet Zendor.
The point that everyone seems to be missing is that Chandler is meant to be Exchange Server killer (or any groupware server killer). The big idea is to use a P2P like setup to exchange email, contact and meeting info. Another words have all the groupware functionality, without a groupware server.
We shouldn't have to wait for NASA to do this. We can all talk to people about this - most people are happy to accept evidence and reasonable explanations. Check CSICOP for materials.
My favorite way to refute psychics is a joke: "I don't believe in psychics, because you have to make an appointment".
Do you know certainly that both servents... BearShare and LimeWire... are not completely free... both are full of ad/spyware (in free version).
Limewire has a GPL version at www.limewire.org. There is no spyware in it. You can always checkout the lastest CVS version, compile it and use it. I do.
Viagra is a major improvment in perceived life quality.
Viagra is a major boom for the porn industry too...
Re:And why is this here?
on
Starcraft
·
· Score: 2
In short, we may or may not be observing visitors from other worlds, but until we have reproducible evidence and control groups, none of this can be considered science. BTW, so you don't think I'm picking on you just to be a jerk blowing off steam, Mathematics and Computer Programming aren't science either. The results are valid, but must be measured for correctness by a different yardstick than the scientific method.
No problem. Thanks for taking time to explain. I was just being lazy.
You're right about Math, an computer programming is just engineering. I always liked math because there you can get as close as possible to "absolute truth", even if it's only relative to some axioms. Science and engineering are a lot messier.
Re:And why is this here?
on
Starcraft
·
· Score: 2
The ancient astronaut theory, though not DEBUNKED, has often rested in shaky evidence, assumptions, and outright hoaxes.
One of the properties of a scientific theory is that in principle you can present evedence to refute it. What evidence could I present, in principle, that would refute this theory?
If there is none, then it's not a theory. I just a fairy tale, like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny...
Wait, did I tell you I was abducted by te Easter Bunny.....
Slashdot Mirror
If you are a software engineer people, who pay you, will depend on your judgment to select the right tool for the job, It's your responsibility to know the options.
In other fields of engineering this is expected.
You're talking esoterica and dusty cobwebbed corners of the field -- not anything that 99% of engineers will ever need to know.
Thanks. That was exactly the answer I was expecting. I suggest you take a look at this article to start with.
You are right, that there is software that doesn't need to be scalable and be able to handle tons of transactions.
But very often these applications are much more sophisticated in what they do between the retrieval and store operations. I worked on a system that never had more than twenty users, but did some pretty fancy processing . This was at an investment bank, and this software enabled us to make a lot of money.
In any case, as a software engineer, you should know which situation you are in. Beware of the case of a Java Applet prototype being rolled out to 10,000 users because someone high up really liked it.
There is a certain amount of background knowledge that's hard to acquire by yourself. I'm not saying that it's not possible, but difficult. It's a lot easier with a guidance from someone else.
For example, now many of these freshly minted self-educated Java programmers know Lisp? How many would even know why Lisp is important?
Yep. Even before eight.
I've been coding for money for over 24 years now. :-)
Unfortunately that's what managers who build their prototypes with Access over the weekend think.
The problem becomes more diffcult if you have to find the data in a 100Gig database, while 10,000 other people are trying to do the same thing.
While another 2345 users are trying to update the same records. Oh, yeah and all the access if over a wide-area network, with the users expecting sub-second response.
Think of credit card verification system. Each transaction is trivially simple - get credit available, subtract payment, store new balance.
Alan Kay once had a nice analogy for this issue. Anybody can build a doghouse. You can get some wood from Home Depot and put a usable doghouse together.
However, the ability to build a doghouse does not qualify you as a builder of sky scrapers. The doghouse methods do not scale up.
That's certainly a big part of it.
However, there is a large part of accumulated knowledge that you need to learn to be a proficient software engineer. You can do it on your own, but classroom can provide a clear direction and help filter the stupid stuff from the essential stuff.
Ha, ha. No.
I'm just tired of having to deal with people who think that building a doghouse (i.e. writing silly programs on their computer) qualifies them to design a skyscraper.
Maybe. But I've written code which handles 100 billions (that's 10e9) US dollars everyday. If I screwed up, I can put a big dent in the economy (for example Bank of NY had a nasty failure in the arly 80s that stopped their clearing systems for 2 days, they nearly went out of business - BTW that wasn't my code :-)).
Would you like to have your money handled by someone who learned to code by reading "VB For Dummies"?
You'd be surprized. I've read about a surgeon who was using a laptop with spreadsheets in for some OR computations (sorry, I don't have a reference).
But, think about those guys who learned by reading "Programming for Dummies" writing code to manage your checkbook. Not life threatening, but...
I guess you are right. I've also seen people with degrees who couldn't code their way out of a paper bag.
However, some formal education is necessary at some point in the life of a sofware engineer. If you are good, at least you should understand why.
Plus, there were many very smart people who came before you and solved the same problems at least once.
I supposed if you are self-taught be reading Knuth and doing all the problems, then it's quite different from reading "VB For Dummies".
I'm happy that you found a new career. Please leave building software to people who were trained how to do it. Would you go to a "self-taught" surgeon?
Well, I read a blurb in Wired about Chandler. But here is another article from Mercury News.
You can always google "kapor and chandler".
For small companies not buying an Exchange server is an option.
You could also build/sell an interface between the Chandler network and an Exchange Server...(a la stuff from Ximian).
Precisely! That's why Chandler aims to remove the need for groupware servers altogether, by using P2P style distribution.
No! The point of Chandler is that it does not need any server. So, people will be able to get all required groupware functionality, without a server.
Right! And Chandler's mission is to eliminate the need for things like the Exchange Server. Use P2P and NO server.
I would argue that there are some things that are independent of the "human" part. For example, 2 + 2 = 4 (assuming the usual meaning of these symbols), and no "miracle" or wishful thinking will make it otherwise. This is true for humans as well as aliens from planet Zendor.
My favorite way to refute psychics is a joke: "I don't believe in psychics, because you have to make an appointment".
So, go out there and do your job... :-)
It's not faith. It's logic. There is a difference.
Limewire has a GPL version at www.limewire.org. There is no spyware in it. You can always checkout the lastest CVS version, compile it and use it. I do.
Viagra is a major boom for the porn industry too...
No problem. Thanks for taking time to explain. I was just being lazy.
You're right about Math, an computer programming is just engineering. I always liked math because there you can get as close as possible to "absolute truth", even if it's only relative to some axioms. Science and engineering are a lot messier.
One of the properties of a scientific theory is that in principle you can present evedence to refute it. What evidence could I present, in principle, that would refute this theory?
If there is none, then it's not a theory. I just a fairy tale, like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny...
Wait, did I tell you I was abducted by te Easter Bunny.....