Funny, they have suppressed search results for "yahoo axis chrome". Query "yahoo axis key" returns articles about the leak, but you have to know what you're looking for.
Computing (as in development of automatic behavior of machines) is still a forbidden lore out of the reach of the masses, but it shouldn't be that way.
We're at the early stages of software development where a few scribes herd the knowledge of the kingdom and eveyone else must subcontract them to fulfill their needs for automation. In the future we'll have software development tools that don't require having a career to create some trigger conditions and simple interactions; until then, it's good that people interested in computers have a venue to be initiated in the basics of the current state of the profession.
I think the Slashdot effect might have something to do. I don't know how bad it is lately, though; maybe a small farm of modern servers may stand the load - but who would pay for it?
Direct editing of tokens used less memory in the edit buffer, making the reserved RAM space smaller and thus allowing BASIC programs to be bigger. For really big programs that sqeezed the system resources, this made a difference.
A psy degree gives you a natural advantage for IT at the side of creating interfaces for humans, as opposed to system designers (you know what I mean). Field research, cognitive principles and surveys design is the basis for User Centered Design, the most common technique of UxD.
This profession is also full of self-made people, since there are few schools that directly specialize in . Given that you already know how to program, talking to your web designers and back-end developers will be a breeze.
So you missed all the "catch the lizard tails to upgrade your grip power" and "ride the giant eagle to fly the countryside" and "climb the tower to visit the secret garden" and the "new game plus to unlock the magic weapons?" (How did you defeat the colossi without the lizard tails BTW)? You should be reading the game walkthroughs when you think you're missing the fun.
Following your metaphor, is more like constructing a robot to swim in shit for you, while you safely send high-level directions from a control room. This would a most preferred way to deal with shitty environments. Of course you wouldn't need it if you're operating in an operating theater.
Scientific method is for research, and it involves devising theories that make sense.
Yup, it looks that we agree to something for the first time.
I wasn't ever talking about debugging and always about researching an unknown or under-specified problem. I'm afraid you completely misunderstood my position thinking that I was talking of the implementation phase of protramming, i.e. writing code. I was not.
I was talking about problem-solving using a semi-automated environment that would generate on-the-fly logic inferences, so that the computer controller could use the hyman brain's strengths to recognize which computer inferences are relevant to the problem to be solved, reason whether they are correct or not, and then commit the correct ones to be the problem's mathematical definition. Something like Mathlab and Octave, but with computer-specific reasoning primitives. PROLOG and Haskell are often used in similar ways to what I propose, but they aren't there yet.
It's a shame that you answered AC and won't likely read my answer. These are the ideas I would have liked to discuss. This is how computers will be controlled in the future. The same way than computers allowed mathematicians to build agent-based models to research whole systems, when previously only formulas on pen-and-paper could be used, computing will benefit from approaches than the first computer programmers in the 50s couldn't dream of supporting (and whose methods still form the basis of all the professional technical environments nowadays).
Unfortunately everybody else placed their preconceptions in line and assumed that I was talking about using a debugger to tweak input cases of function calls, when I meant the completely different topic of using an evolved computer model to discover and analize the properties of the world. Shame that we got an almost 0 signal-to-noise ratio.
And what is physics other than applied mathematics? (plus empiric tests, of course).
This is indeed done from abstract concepts and first principles. If you are discovering and learning how to solve a business problem while typing away source code, then you are in the wrong trade and your code is doomed to fail.
writing code without understanding why it does what it does and then moving it around until you hit some sort of 'win' condition is called Cargo Cult Programming. Too bad that this is not what I'm advocating and Alex Belits (437) was attacking a straw man, isn't it?
When you write code the code does what you tell it to do. And how do you find out what exactly you need to tell the code to do? I'm stating that building computer models is a good way to clarify that initial idea; i.e. to create a DESIGN, as you named it.
Thanks for the link. Who knows how it will turn out? There weren't computers nor neuroscience when the scientific method was developed, and look how far it has brought us. Who can say what will happen with a method designed with those in mind?
As long as you have perfect knowledge of the environment on which the system will run.
The tools in the video are best for the cases when you don't have done in advance a perfect analysis of all the existing conditions of the environment; in that case, the tool will allow you to create the perfect knowledge that you will need to complete an error-free working program.
Yup, already seen that; together with his low ID, that's why assumed he worked with classical well-defined problems A low ID on Slashdot has the potential of never making mistakes, if only because they apply their skills to that limited subset of the problems of the world. (It's the kindest assumption, the other one being that he is a severe case of the Dunning-Kruger effect, which is the other likely explanation for an overconfident low ID user).
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, they have suppressed search results for "yahoo axis chrome". Query "yahoo axis key" returns articles about the leak, but you have to know what you're looking for.
There, and I thought my ISP's bandwitdh was awful.
This.
Computing (as in development of automatic behavior of machines) is still a forbidden lore out of the reach of the masses, but it shouldn't be that way.
We're at the early stages of software development where a few scribes herd the knowledge of the kingdom and eveyone else must subcontract them to fulfill their needs for automation. In the future we'll have software development tools that don't require having a career to create some trigger conditions and simple interactions; until then, it's good that people interested in computers have a venue to be initiated in the basics of the current state of the profession.
Answer this: does genetic predisposition force one to become left-handed?
But Pfizer solution didn't manipulate the actuators with cables.
I think the Slashdot effect might have something to do. I don't know how bad it is lately, though; maybe a small farm of modern servers may stand the load - but who would pay for it?
Direct editing of tokens used less memory in the edit buffer, making the reserved RAM space smaller and thus allowing BASIC programs to be bigger. For really big programs that sqeezed the system resources, this made a difference.
That's called "knowing people" and has nothing to do with sexual orientation.
What is this HN site you like?
A psy degree gives you a natural advantage for IT at the side of creating interfaces for humans, as opposed to system designers (you know what I mean). Field research, cognitive principles and surveys design is the basis for User Centered Design, the most common technique of UxD.
This profession is also full of self-made people, since there are few schools that directly specialize in . Given that you already know how to program, talking to your web designers and back-end developers will be a breeze.
So you missed all the "catch the lizard tails to upgrade your grip power" and "ride the giant eagle to fly the countryside" and "climb the tower to visit the secret garden" and the "new game plus to unlock the magic weapons?" (How did you defeat the colossi without the lizard tails BTW)? You should be reading the game walkthroughs when you think you're missing the fun.
s/game/gamer/
You must be a different kind of game than I am. I never get tired of looking at thinks in SoC. Navigating the country was the best part of it.
The original article video author has a really good example of this approach. Enjoy!
Following your metaphor, is more like constructing a robot to swim in shit for you, while you safely send high-level directions from a control room. This would a most preferred way to deal with shitty environments. Of course you wouldn't need it if you're operating in an operating theater.
Scientific method is for research, and it involves devising theories that make sense.
Yup, it looks that we agree to something for the first time.
I wasn't ever talking about debugging and always about researching an unknown or under-specified problem. I'm afraid you completely misunderstood my position thinking that I was talking of the implementation phase of protramming, i.e. writing code. I was not.
I was talking about problem-solving using a semi-automated environment that would generate on-the-fly logic inferences, so that the computer controller could use the hyman brain's strengths to recognize which computer inferences are relevant to the problem to be solved, reason whether they are correct or not, and then commit the correct ones to be the problem's mathematical definition. Something like Mathlab and Octave, but with computer-specific reasoning primitives. PROLOG and Haskell are often used in similar ways to what I propose, but they aren't there yet.
We are 100% in agreement. It's a shame that your post is completely orthogonal to what I intended to discuss. ;-)
It's a shame that you answered AC and won't likely read my answer. These are the ideas I would have liked to discuss. This is how computers will be controlled in the future. The same way than computers allowed mathematicians to build agent-based models to research whole systems, when previously only formulas on pen-and-paper could be used, computing will benefit from approaches than the first computer programmers in the 50s couldn't dream of supporting (and whose methods still form the basis of all the professional technical environments nowadays).
Unfortunately everybody else placed their preconceptions in line and assumed that I was talking about using a debugger to tweak input cases of function calls, when I meant the completely different topic of using an evolved computer model to discover and analize the properties of the world. Shame that we got an almost 0 signal-to-noise ratio.
And what is physics other than applied mathematics? (plus empiric tests, of course).
This is indeed done from abstract concepts and first principles. If you are discovering and learning how to solve a business problem while typing away source code, then you are in the wrong trade and your code is doomed to fail.
There's a whole field of computer science that disagrees with you. (BTW you're the only one talking about "typing". I was always about "using" software to find out business models, which is a significant and completely different alternative).
writing code without understanding why it does what it does and then moving it around until you hit some sort of 'win' condition is called Cargo Cult Programming.
Too bad that this is not what I'm advocating and Alex Belits (437) was attacking a straw man, isn't it?
When you write code the code does what you tell it to do.
And how do you find out what exactly you need to tell the code to do? I'm stating that building computer models is a good way to clarify that initial idea; i.e. to create a DESIGN, as you named it.
Thanks for the link. Who knows how it will turn out? There weren't computers nor neuroscience when the scientific method was developed, and look how far it has brought us. Who can say what will happen with a method designed with those in mind?
s/modal/model/
As long as you have perfect knowledge of the environment on which the system will run.
The tools in the video are best for the cases when you don't have done in advance a perfect analysis of all the existing conditions of the environment; in that case, the tool will allow you to create the perfect knowledge that you will need to complete an error-free working program.
Yup, already seen that; together with his low ID, that's why assumed he worked with classical well-defined problems A low ID on Slashdot has the potential of never making mistakes, if only because they apply their skills to that limited subset of the problems of the world. (It's the kindest assumption, the other one being that he is a severe case of the Dunning-Kruger effect, which is the other likely explanation for an overconfident low ID user).