Are you saying that trial and error isn't appropriate for a system that cannot fail even one time?
I think it'd be very appropriate to build reactor control software with tests. Lots of tests. Lots and lots of tests. And you can simulate every device out there, you can simulate what happens when pressure builds or releases unexpectedly, you can simulate what happens when the operator pours his pepsi down the control panel and provides you with non-sensible inputs, etc.
Matter of fact, I can't see any other way to build safety critical software. Not just testing the hell out of it, but designing it to be testable in the first place.
If you can't express what you want your software to do properly without throwing shit and attempting to get it to stick, what could possibly make you think you're qualified to create a simulator that reflects reality enough to be useful?
If you're going to build safety critical software, it has to be deterministic. You can't assure that is the case with software built by trial and error.
Where's that shortened URL going, goatse? Be advised that when I moderate, if I see a shortened URL in a comment I'm just going to assume it's goatse or tubgirl and automatically mod it "troll," because there's no other reason to use a shortened URL at slashdot other than to trick people into going somewhere they don't want to go.
This isn't twitter. If that link is legit, use the whole damned thing. A short URL here makes you look like a twit.
It's going to a picture of a caveman, standing in front of a campfire, talking to his cavewoman, with the caption "I was just rubbing two sticks together, I didn't know I was doing basic research", which is funny and relevant because it makes a joke of statements about how difficult buckyballs are to manufacture.
Honestly, if your dog bit my kid because she was teasing it, my kid would be grounded, and your dog would be dead, and if you tried to prevent it, I'd most likely beat the shit out of you on your front lawn in front of your wife and kids and end up in the back of a police cruiser.
Personally, I prefer fish. They never pester you for attention when you're trying to code.
They'll wake up tomorrow, and find that fuckin' green statue dropped from 30000 feet on top of their beloved Awful Tower. That'll teach 'em a thing or two about democracy...
Democracy won't fix anything if your country is full of assholes...
Note that Indonesia is generally considered to be one of the most civilized Muslim majority countries - it's not officially an "Islamic state", and it clearly sets out freedom of religion in its constitution. Yet almost half of their population - exactly half if you only count Muslims - support death penalty, carried out in public, in a very nasty way that's deliberately designed to be prolonged and painful, and performed with active involvement of the community (to remind, rajm is generally meant to be carried out by the observers throwing stones). I'm not ashamed in the slightest of calling that half barbarians, because that's what they are in this day and age.
Their laws have popular support. They do not allow others to kill for them behind closed doors and pretend that their hands are clean. They face the consequences of their way of life head on. They protect their communities from adulterers who spread disease and discord. And, they do not make slaves of each other by saddling their young with tens of thousands of dollars in interest bearing debt before they enter into adult society.
Prove to the world that this "Science" of yours grants a greater evolutionary advantage to its adherents than these cruel religions do, and you will end the debate. Your opponents do not think of it in those words, but that is where the crux of it all lies.
Where you stand on the fight for privacy fight boils down this: How much is your hypocracy worth to you, and how much does other peoples hypocracy cost you.
What you would call "self-development", I would call "excessive disconnect".
If this were a debate, and the measure of value were to lie in what was most palatable to our peers, we would argue back and forth and whichever of us was more convincing would win and make a lot of money on a book tour telling people how to find themselves, achieve zen and be happier than our neighbours.
But when your perspective gives its adherents an evolutionary disadvantage, it really doesn't matter how convincing you are...
No matter how much you want to blame the victim, bad things really do happen to people because of circumstances outside of their control.
Your general message is a good one. People should be responsible for themselves. But claiming that the locus of control should always be internal simply flies in the face of reality.
For example, what if one's boss really is a jerk? No matter how hard you work to please him, you cannot. If you internalized that locus of control, you would conclude that there is something terribly wrong with you. That's not a healthy frame of mind at all.
If your boss really is a jerk, then it was your fault because you were stupid enough to take a job working for a jerk, and you'll never do that again. If your old boss wasn't a jerk, but your new boss is a jerk, then it's your fault for lingering after you recognized that your new boss was a jerk instead of moving on, and you'll never do that again.
Effective people find a way to bring their life under control.
Human brains lose plasticity as they age. The longer we wait to pair off, the less we are able to adapt to our mate, and them to us.
Human lives have chapters in them, like a story, and everything has to happen in its proper time. If you fuck with that timing, like we have by driving people to stay single till later in life so they can pursue education and career, you fuck the person up. Forever.
It's just like all those studies that show teenagers are much more vulnerable to drug addiction than mature adults. Pheremones are the drugs kids are supposed to get addicted to.
maybe it would actually be a net benefit for the world if you too did not have children.
Well, I do, and I'll be having more, and if all goes according to plan, I'll offer them a small house to start a family in when they turn 21. If they want to borrow against it to go to university, that's up to them.
You don't get any tax breaks for being married, dumb ass.
Yes, you do, dumb ass. The most straightforward mechanism; you pay higher taxes the more you earn, and when you're married, you can let your spouse claim half your income, while you claim the other half, thus putting you in a lower tax bracket and reducing your tax burden. Then you put the liberated money into tax-free investment vehicles, further reducing your taxes, liberating more money. I helped people do it for a living before quickly growing disgusted with the whole affair and moving to a different industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you saying that trial and error isn't appropriate for a system that cannot fail even one time?
I think it'd be very appropriate to build reactor control software with tests. Lots of tests. Lots and lots of tests. And you can simulate every device out there, you can simulate what happens when pressure builds or releases unexpectedly, you can simulate what happens when the operator pours his pepsi down the control panel and provides you with non-sensible inputs, etc.
Matter of fact, I can't see any other way to build safety critical software. Not just testing the hell out of it, but designing it to be testable in the first place.
If you can't express what you want your software to do properly without throwing shit and attempting to get it to stick, what could possibly make you think you're qualified to create a simulator that reflects reality enough to be useful?
If you're going to build safety critical software, it has to be deterministic. You can't assure that is the case with software built by trial and error.
Fuck him for making video games. Go starve.
Why any policeman would think it's reasonable conduct to pepper spray a line of kneeling civilians is beyond me.
Probably feelings of disgust, frustruation and anger
I'd be looking around for a rifle if I saw that happening.
They would respect that. They would kill you, but they would have more respect for you.
Just saying... this is their brain.
If this is true, it is time to start hanging people. Law or not law.
http://tinyurl.com/7bfsaky
Where's that shortened URL going, goatse? Be advised that when I moderate, if I see a shortened URL in a comment I'm just going to assume it's goatse or tubgirl and automatically mod it "troll," because there's no other reason to use a shortened URL at slashdot other than to trick people into going somewhere they don't want to go.
This isn't twitter. If that link is legit, use the whole damned thing. A short URL here makes you look like a twit.
It's going to a picture of a caveman, standing in front of a campfire, talking to his cavewoman, with the caption "I was just rubbing two sticks together, I didn't know I was doing basic research", which is funny and relevant because it makes a joke of statements about how difficult buckyballs are to manufacture.
One of us is a twit, but it isn't me.
http://tinyurl.com/7bfsaky
I call it Gnu/Linux because things that are new sound cooler. If someone forked the kernel and called it ImprovedLinux, I would use that instead.
No, but I'm seriously considering relocating to a Muslim country if they will have me...
Honestly, if your dog bit my kid because she was teasing it, my kid would be grounded, and your dog would be dead, and if you tried to prevent it, I'd most likely beat the shit out of you on your front lawn in front of your wife and kids and end up in the back of a police cruiser.
Personally, I prefer fish. They never pester you for attention when you're trying to code.
If a child teases a dog and it bites them, you shoot the dog. That doesn't mean you don't hold the child responsible.
I think its a valid analogy.
In that case, they shouldn't have shot the drone... they should have beaten the drones father for failing to teach it proper behavior.
And if women didn't walk around dressed like sluts, they wouldn't get raped.
That's true, but how does this relate to the conversation?
They'll wake up tomorrow, and find that fuckin' green statue dropped from 30000 feet on top of their beloved Awful Tower. That'll teach 'em a thing or two about democracy...
Democracy won't fix anything if your country is full of assholes...
Note that Indonesia is generally considered to be one of the most civilized Muslim majority countries - it's not officially an "Islamic state", and it clearly sets out freedom of religion in its constitution. Yet almost half of their population - exactly half if you only count Muslims - support death penalty, carried out in public, in a very nasty way that's deliberately designed to be prolonged and painful, and performed with active involvement of the community (to remind, rajm is generally meant to be carried out by the observers throwing stones). I'm not ashamed in the slightest of calling that half barbarians, because that's what they are in this day and age.
Their laws have popular support. They do not allow others to kill for them behind closed doors and pretend that their hands are clean. They face the consequences of their way of life head on. They protect their communities from adulterers who spread disease and discord. And, they do not make slaves of each other by saddling their young with tens of thousands of dollars in interest bearing debt before they enter into adult society.
They are morally superior to you.
Prove to the world that this "Science" of yours grants a greater evolutionary advantage to its adherents than these cruel religions do, and you will end the debate. Your opponents do not think of it in those words, but that is where the crux of it all lies.
Where you stand on the fight for privacy fight boils down this: How much is your hypocracy worth to you, and how much does other peoples hypocracy cost you.
Why do I have to be the first to say it?
Format the drive. Store data on it. Move on with your life. It's a non-issue. Quit being a drama queen.
Heh, if Atlas ever Shrugs, rich jerks are going to fall like raindrops...
When you work for a jerk, you elevate him. Technically, it's only his fault that he's a jerk. It's your fault that he's the boss.
They're countering stupidity with insanity. Eventually, all words will become noise, and the issue will go away.
What you would call "self-development", I would call "excessive disconnect".
If this were a debate, and the measure of value were to lie in what was most palatable to our peers, we would argue back and forth and whichever of us was more convincing would win and make a lot of money on a book tour telling people how to find themselves, achieve zen and be happier than our neighbours.
But when your perspective gives its adherents an evolutionary disadvantage, it really doesn't matter how convincing you are...
No matter how much you want to blame the victim, bad things really do happen to people because of circumstances outside of their control.
Your general message is a good one. People should be responsible for themselves. But claiming that the locus of control should always be internal simply flies in the face of reality.
For example, what if one's boss really is a jerk? No matter how hard you work to please him, you cannot. If you internalized that locus of control, you would conclude that there is something terribly wrong with you. That's not a healthy frame of mind at all.
If your boss really is a jerk, then it was your fault because you were stupid enough to take a job working for a jerk, and you'll never do that again. If your old boss wasn't a jerk, but your new boss is a jerk, then it's your fault for lingering after you recognized that your new boss was a jerk instead of moving on, and you'll never do that again.
Effective people find a way to bring their life under control.
Human brains lose plasticity as they age. The longer we wait to pair off, the less we are able to adapt to our mate, and them to us.
Human lives have chapters in them, like a story, and everything has to happen in its proper time. If you fuck with that timing, like we have by driving people to stay single till later in life so they can pursue education and career, you fuck the person up. Forever.
It's just like all those studies that show teenagers are much more vulnerable to drug addiction than mature adults. Pheremones are the drugs kids are supposed to get addicted to.
maybe it would actually be a net benefit for the world if you too did not have children.
Well, I do, and I'll be having more, and if all goes according to plan, I'll offer them a small house to start a family in when they turn 21. If they want to borrow against it to go to university, that's up to them.
You don't get any tax breaks for being married, dumb ass.
Yes, you do, dumb ass. The most straightforward mechanism; you pay higher taxes the more you earn, and when you're married, you can let your spouse claim half your income, while you claim the other half, thus putting you in a lower tax bracket and reducing your tax burden. Then you put the liberated money into tax-free investment vehicles, further reducing your taxes, liberating more money. I helped people do it for a living before quickly growing disgusted with the whole affair and moving to a different industry.