A magazine here in Belgium (Humo) did a couple of years ago an experiment about the stock market to see what recommendations of experts were worth.
They had a team of chimpanzees and a team of experts. The results were that the chimpanzees did better than the experts.
Since the chimpanzees can probably be considered a very good random number generator, it seems that it would also probably be better to use random predictions.
Or, as Roger Von Oech would say, "Consult an Oracle".
This whole thread seems to miss the point that QA is only there to catch problems, not fix them. The fix is done due to QA entering a report, which then needs to be solved by a real developer.
I have been reading Slashdot since 2001, but I can't remember having seen an article on such a gross topic. Too much imagination, and having memories about my daughter puking in her bed (not recently), makes me really go eeeewww!
After having not used C for more than eight years (I studied Lisp in the meantime, and got my Master degree in Electronics and Software Engineering, where I also learned C# and Java), I restarted a project that I had already done a couple of years ago in Perl, the implementation of a simple Lisp interpreter (base: the metacircular evaluator of SICP).
C is low level, but that was exactly what I needed, because I want to use my knowledge to build the same project on an FPGA. So with C I could properly emulate a 64k byte space and manipulate the proper bits in every cell.
What did I use from my experience in a whole lot of programming languages (been programming since 1984):
Functional decomposition, which has nothing to do with functional programming, but is based on the architecture of the system
Data driven evaluation
Test driven development, made easier by the functional decomposition
The lessons of OO are not lost on me, but OO is the logical end point of functional decomposition. One needs to be able to know where to stop decomposing the problem into classes and objects. I think that was for me the most important lesson learned in the last eight years.
For implementing the evaluator, it was enough to define a couple of different modules in different sources, which exported only what was needed. This is just the first layer of OO. No inheritance needed.
There is a background history to guns that U.S. citizens tend to forget, because they do not seem to understand the middle ages.
The initial development of gunpowder lead to to weapons, specifically for war. The later development of portable guns was always in the function of killing people. It is probably only in the 18th century that guns became easy enough to be used as hunting tools (can't find references about this).
People on the North American frontier needed guns to defend and to feed themselves. This was probably the first and last time in history that guns became a tool for personal support.
I think that is the main difference in culture between the US and Europe. On the European continent, guns have mostly (99.99%) been part of the armies, which were directed by the kings and nobility. I think that there is a deep, unconscious suspicion against gun ownership in Europe. In Europe, guns have never been the tools of liberation, but always of oppression. In the U.S., this became the opposite.
However, I would warn those people who think that their gun ownership make them safe for criminals or can be used against their government.
In the first case, if a criminal wants to get you, he will take more time planning and be prepared to use means that he can get to, but you can't. In the case of petty criminality, citizen gun ownership will probably make a difference, but in the case of heavy criminality, you will almost certainly lose.
In the second case, I suggest that people who think they can use their guns successfully against their government, study the Boer Wars. Yes, it was not easy for the English to succeed, but succeed they finally did. It is just a case of planning, time and means. Then compare the former English army at the end of the 19th century with the current U.S. Army.
Are you aware that some people call themselves British, even though Britain consists of England, Wales and Scotland?
Or that there are people who call themselves German, even though Germany is a federation of a whole lot of regions. Have a look at the history of Germany, how long the entity Germany only exists and the dissolving of Prussia.
I think it is better for people in Europe to start calling themselves Europeans, while at the same time embracing the regional differences there are in geography, climate, language and culture.
Look at history, and see what happens when a cultural entity is not prepared to adapt, but staunchly keeps to its roots, e.g. the Spartans.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't Chuck Moore implement this already 20 years ago?
I think that the people of the United States need to declare war on the Democratic and Republican party.
You should take every opportunity to attack these parties, to organise and think about strategies to hurt them.
The Belt or ASTEX ?
Lazy the Gnome, is that you?
+1 Funny, Please!
A magazine here in Belgium (Humo) did a couple of years ago an experiment about the stock market to see what recommendations of experts were worth.
They had a team of chimpanzees and a team of experts. The results were that the chimpanzees did better than the experts.
Since the chimpanzees can probably be considered a very good random number generator, it seems that it would also probably be better to use random predictions.
Or, as Roger Von Oech would say, "Consult an Oracle".
This is in fact a proper application of the butterfly effect.
Pizza the Hutt!
Encrust Finished Goods with Uranium
Quantity: Inf
Only when it is in their favour
They should probably read A Whack on the Side of the Head and A Kick in the Seat of the Pants. Not to be more creative, but to learn that success can lead you to ruin.
Quote: "There is a greater need to extinguish arrogance than a blazing fire"!
You are from Elbonia?
This whole thread seems to miss the point that QA is only there to catch problems, not fix them. The fix is done due to QA entering a report, which then needs to be solved by a real developer.
I have been reading Slashdot since 2001, but I can't remember having seen an article on such a gross topic. Too much imagination, and having memories about my daughter puking in her bed (not recently), makes me really go eeeewww!
After having not used C for more than eight years (I studied Lisp in the meantime, and got my Master degree in Electronics and Software Engineering, where I also learned C# and Java), I restarted a project that I had already done a couple of years ago in Perl, the implementation of a simple Lisp interpreter (base: the metacircular evaluator of SICP).
C is low level, but that was exactly what I needed, because I want to use my knowledge to build the same project on an FPGA. So with C I could properly emulate a 64k byte space and manipulate the proper bits in every cell.
What did I use from my experience in a whole lot of programming languages (been programming since 1984):
The lessons of OO are not lost on me, but OO is the logical end point of functional decomposition. One needs to be able to know where to stop decomposing the problem into classes and objects. I think that was for me the most important lesson learned in the last eight years.
For implementing the evaluator, it was enough to define a couple of different modules in different sources, which exported only what was needed. This is just the first layer of OO. No inheritance needed.
What were the results exactly?
The Arsenals of Isher?
And the nutjob will take his time to make a plan to inflict maximum damage, knowing that there are people with guns for protection against him.
There is a background history to guns that U.S. citizens tend to forget, because they do not seem to understand the middle ages.
The initial development of gunpowder lead to to weapons, specifically for war. The later development of portable guns was always in the function of killing people. It is probably only in the 18th century that guns became easy enough to be used as hunting tools (can't find references about this).
People on the North American frontier needed guns to defend and to feed themselves. This was probably the first and last time in history that guns became a tool for personal support.
I think that is the main difference in culture between the US and Europe. On the European continent, guns have mostly (99.99%) been part of the armies, which were directed by the kings and nobility. I think that there is a deep, unconscious suspicion against gun ownership in Europe. In Europe, guns have never been the tools of liberation, but always of oppression. In the U.S., this became the opposite.
However, I would warn those people who think that their gun ownership make them safe for criminals or can be used against their government.
In the first case, if a criminal wants to get you, he will take more time planning and be prepared to use means that he can get to, but you can't. In the case of petty criminality, citizen gun ownership will probably make a difference, but in the case of heavy criminality, you will almost certainly lose.
In the second case, I suggest that people who think they can use their guns successfully against their government, study the Boer Wars. Yes, it was not easy for the English to succeed, but succeed they finally did. It is just a case of planning, time and means. Then compare the former English army at the end of the 19th century with the current U.S. Army.
There were more than a couple of people defending the Chromebook, which did surprise me. Interesting development.
Our pints are 25cl or 33cl, or 50cl depending on the beer, the country and the brewer!
I think that the Belgian authorities should also try to organise this in a European context (L'union fait la force!).
Another idea I had: how should crowdsourcing be organised to damage scientology (I refuse them a capital)?
Baader and Meinhof were also descendants of well to do people. However, I do not think OWS compares to the Baader-Meinhof group.
Don't care for moderation: just let TV die, the golden age of TV was the 60's and 70's, all the rest sucks. TV must die!
Are you aware that some people call themselves British, even though Britain consists of England, Wales and Scotland?
Or that there are people who call themselves German, even though Germany is a federation of a whole lot of regions. Have a look at the history of Germany, how long the entity Germany only exists and the dissolving of Prussia.
I think it is better for people in Europe to start calling themselves Europeans, while at the same time embracing the regional differences there are in geography, climate, language and culture.
Look at history, and see what happens when a cultural entity is not prepared to adapt, but staunchly keeps to its roots, e.g. the Spartans.