If naive packing algorithms waste at most 30% of space (i.e. a constant coefficient), but the population (and our associated resource consumption) is growing at least geometrically if not exponentially, then one must show that more efficient packing is at least a catalyst for some other kind of supralinear reduction in resource consumption (or other benefit) for the premise of "saving the planet" to be plausible.
By all means, someone can correct my simplistic thinking?
Perhaps if you had a portable computer, you'd get out of the house more and have more exposure to people who know how to spell words like "hand-built" and "terabyte", and who know that while using "CPU" to refer to an assembled computer could be synecdochic, the term "CPU unit" is redundant and proof positive that you're just a housebound failure.
You're also drawing a false comparison between what is most likely a Pentium 4 class rig, incapable of exploiting the 4 gigs you're running in it, and more modern hardware. Your 2 grand rig probably could have been put together for half that.
Ironically, most of us probably agree with your conclusion, that the W700ds carries a ridiculous premium, but I for one wouldn't want to be on your debate team.
Re:One gene != one characteristic
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 1
How much time in Denny's do you spend that you are getting enough data points to formulate an economic theory based on their wait staff's intelligence?
If it's a lot of time, then based on the soundness of your dining choices, I have to question your ability to assess wait staff intelligence, as your own would seem to be in doubt.
If it's seldom, then I have to question your intelligence as measured by your understanding of sampling theory, as your own would seem to be in doubt.
Word to the wise: keep the Dennynomics to yourself, homey (hammy?)
Let me restate what he said in more concrete terms, that you might have more trouble misinterpreting:
Consider the following possible "realities" for a problem developer who produces average code but never gets work done on time. 1) I claim to be a developer who spends hours in heavy mental design exercises and analysis before writing a line of code; hence, I am not done yet. 2) I claim to be a solid coder just who estimates poorly; hence, I am not done yet. 3) I procrastinate and get work done at the last minute; hence, I am not done yet. 4) I just don't care; hence, I am not done yet.
From a manager's perspective, the etiology just doesn't matter. I can't count on you, and it may not be worth my time to try and fix you. Maybe that doesn't make me the world's most gifted manager, but I have a job to do and you're not doing it, so your employment sucks for both of us.
The irony of your question is that the aforementioned problem developers all tend to kiss ass more than the other guys who are proudly getting their shit done!
There is a logical solution to the problem of being one of these theoretical undocumented money-bringers.
Don't be one.
If you think you may be such a person, make it a point not to work on projects whose worth is not documented. Refuse to work for managers who are incapable of making a business case or justifying their team's existence to higher-ups.
If the framework is good, And your team is good, And they have thought hard about how to express their design problem in terms of the framework, and found it wanting,
Then perhaps it is not The Best Framework for your team.
If that seems like an oversimplification, consider it another way:
What is your product, and how many resources do you have?
How much time you do you want to be spending tweaking frameworks?
It would be considerably more interesting if Windows 7 offered an out-of-the-box processing abstraction on top of GPGPUs, PhysX type accelerators, and other non-traditional "cores".
Most enthusiast PCs and increasing numbers of mainstream PCs have been running a multi-core video card for a while now - it would be nice to see the development interface to these standardized, so one didn't necessarily have to learn e.g. CUDA.
Perhaps the results of this research can be used to create biological instances of the satisfiability problem.
If satisfiability can be reduced to DNA transcription in polynomial time, then we could genetically engineer colonies of randomly poisoned cats in boxes to solve NP-complete problems.
The unexpected conclusion of Zeller and Felton's paper is that the worldwide banking collapse is actually a protective measure against malware. With assets illiquid, even CSRF attacks can't move money!
Is the problem one of craft or mentality?
on
Clean Code
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I don't know that this is the right book for the general problem.
In my career, the engineers who have been the most effective and most pleasant to work with usually do what they can to be better teammates. This includes but is not limited to: writing good code (or improving/refactoring existing code), and managing their personal interactions with teammates toward rational consensus and general embetterment (a perfectly cromulent word).
In my experience, the guys who consistently write the worst code also tend to have "lone wolf" mentalities. These are the guys who say, "if it was hard to write, it should be hard to read", and not half-jokingly. I honestly get the impression that growing up they might not have had the sorts of personal interactions that lead a person to be mindful of "playing nice with others". Coding serves a much more selfish end. This doesn't mean they are not "productive" in the absolute sense, but they are solo silo stars and it's hard to pair or team them.
Put another way, the kind of engineer that would actually benefit from a book like this, has probably already read a book like this.
The needed book I think is for the manager: psychology of the antisocial geek
Speaking of handicaps and stalls, isn't that exactly what's going to happen to many of these 1st- and 2nd-generation SSD drives when they reach their maximum # of write cycles and suddenly fail to be writable anymore?
Are these "budget" SSD players able to come to market in droves because nobody is validating their write management / "wear leveling" logic?
Perhaps the budget SSDs are fine for 95% of would-be users and mainstream applications, but I wonder if enthusiasts are going to see the early SSD limitations earlier.
Slashdot Mirror
It's actually 4,936 albums. I counted them. Yeah, definitely 4,936 albums. 64 more to be 5,000. 7,352 more to be 12,288. So, 4,936 albums really.
If everyone shut their pie hole, Steak and BJ day wouldn't exactly be as much fun either.
Even naive packing algorithms such as "first-fit" have been shown to be relatively close to optimal.
If naive packing algorithms waste at most 30% of space (i.e. a constant coefficient), but the population (and our associated resource consumption) is growing at least geometrically if not exponentially, then one must show that more efficient packing is at least a catalyst for some other kind of supralinear reduction in resource consumption (or other benefit) for the premise of "saving the planet" to be plausible.
By all means, someone can correct my simplistic thinking?
Perhaps if you had a portable computer, you'd get out of the house more and have more exposure to people who know how to spell words like "hand-built" and "terabyte", and who know that while using "CPU" to refer to an assembled computer could be synecdochic, the term "CPU unit" is redundant and proof positive that you're just a housebound failure. You're also drawing a false comparison between what is most likely a Pentium 4 class rig, incapable of exploiting the 4 gigs you're running in it, and more modern hardware. Your 2 grand rig probably could have been put together for half that. Ironically, most of us probably agree with your conclusion, that the W700ds carries a ridiculous premium, but I for one wouldn't want to be on your debate team.
160IQ GET
Barracuda Flounders
I guess I have to be the asshole who asks ...
How much time in Denny's do you spend that you are getting enough data points to formulate an economic theory based on their wait staff's intelligence?
If it's a lot of time, then based on the soundness of your dining choices, I have to question your ability to assess wait staff intelligence, as your own would seem to be in doubt.
If it's seldom, then I have to question your intelligence as measured by your understanding of sampling theory, as your own would seem to be in doubt.
Word to the wise: keep the Dennynomics to yourself, homey (hammy?)
Before anyone repartitions their drive, it's worth reading about cargo cults:
http://wwwcdf.pd.infn.it/~loreti/science.html
Let me restate what he said in more concrete terms, that you might have more trouble misinterpreting:
Consider the following possible "realities" for a problem developer who produces average code but never gets work done on time.
1) I claim to be a developer who spends hours in heavy mental design exercises and analysis before writing a line of code; hence, I am not done yet.
2) I claim to be a solid coder just who estimates poorly; hence, I am not done yet.
3) I procrastinate and get work done at the last minute; hence, I am not done yet.
4) I just don't care; hence, I am not done yet.
From a manager's perspective, the etiology just doesn't matter. I can't count on you, and it may not be worth my time to try and fix you. Maybe that doesn't make me the world's most gifted manager, but I have a job to do and you're not doing it, so your employment sucks for both of us.
The irony of your question is that the aforementioned problem developers all tend to kiss ass more than the other guys who are proudly getting their shit done!
There is a logical solution to the problem of being one of these theoretical undocumented money-bringers.
Don't be one.
If you think you may be such a person, make it a point not to work on projects whose worth is not documented. Refuse to work for managers who are incapable of making a business case or justifying their team's existence to higher-ups.
There, done.
Once bitten, twice a self-victimizer.
If the framework is good,
And your team is good,
And they have thought hard about how to express their design problem in terms of the framework, and found it wanting,
Then perhaps it is not The Best Framework for your team.
If that seems like an oversimplification, consider it another way:
What is your product, and how many resources do you have?
How much time you do you want to be spending tweaking frameworks?
I've seen how the world ends.
SPOILER ALERT
Anthony Edwards and Mare Winningham drown in a helicopter.
I heard the doctor actually texted full instructions on how to reattach the arm but after 151 characters it got cut off.
What is the rate at which new amphibian species are emerging, to replace the endangered?
It would be considerably more interesting if Windows 7 offered an out-of-the-box processing abstraction on top of GPGPUs, PhysX type accelerators, and other non-traditional "cores".
Most enthusiast PCs and increasing numbers of mainstream PCs have been running a multi-core video card for a while now - it would be nice to see the development interface to these standardized, so one didn't necessarily have to learn e.g. CUDA.
Did you know your uid is a prime number when interpreted in base 7 or 11?
How do you sleep at night?
And don't forget the forthcoming Sitar Hero, featuring a unique 64-button controller.
Can you defeat Ravi Shankar in the ultimate semitonal battle?
Perhaps the results of this research can be used to create biological instances of the satisfiability problem.
If satisfiability can be reduced to DNA transcription in polynomial time, then we could genetically engineer colonies of randomly poisoned cats in boxes to solve NP-complete problems.
The unexpected conclusion of Zeller and Felton's paper is that the worldwide banking collapse is actually a protective measure against malware. With assets illiquid, even CSRF attacks can't move money!
I don't know that this is the right book for the general problem.
In my career, the engineers who have been the most effective and most pleasant to work with usually do what they can to be better teammates. This includes but is not limited to: writing good code (or improving/refactoring existing code), and managing their personal interactions with teammates toward rational consensus and general embetterment (a perfectly cromulent word).
In my experience, the guys who consistently write the worst code also tend to have "lone wolf" mentalities. These are the guys who say, "if it was hard to write, it should be hard to read", and not half-jokingly. I honestly get the impression that growing up they might not have had the sorts of personal interactions that lead a person to be mindful of "playing nice with others". Coding serves a much more selfish end. This doesn't mean they are not "productive" in the absolute sense, but they are solo silo stars and it's hard to pair or team them.
Put another way, the kind of engineer that would actually benefit from a book like this, has probably already read a book like this.
The needed book I think is for the manager: psychology of the antisocial geek
Turn those machines back on!
Turn Those Machines Back ON!
Speaking of handicaps and stalls, isn't that exactly what's going to happen to many of these 1st- and 2nd-generation SSD drives when they reach their maximum # of write cycles and suddenly fail to be writable anymore?
Are these "budget" SSD players able to come to market in droves because nobody is validating their write management / "wear leveling" logic?
Perhaps the budget SSDs are fine for 95% of would-be users and mainstream applications, but I wonder if enthusiasts are going to see the early SSD limitations earlier.
You think so? Let's take a pole.
Just finished. Report #3 was particularly good, though 4 and 5 could have been a little more concise (IMHO).
Now, back to chapter 2 of Gravity's Rainbow.
Sorry to disappoint you, but it's a grid on a whiteboard.
A great big whiteboard.
With Expo markers - the good kind, that smell.