"If they chose Yes, I don't want the program to do X. But if they don't, I do what them to do X"
Wow. That may be a typical problem but it's sure's hell not the typical way of stating it. I would have stated it as "If they don't chose Yes, I want them to do X." You sir, cluttered the problem statement with unnecessary verbiage.
So then you have your "easy" programming language that's similar to English. That's great, how do you articulate that previous statement in that language now? It's not any easier.
The opposite is true as well. I spent two decades in banking and ran across many programmers who couldn't for the life of themselves understand the needs and requirements involved. A programmer without the contextual information is just as dangerous.
Other professionals aren't allowed to be self-taught, at least in the civilized world.
You sir or madam, do not know what you are talking about as well as being pompous. As long as you can pass the required certification tests, many professions will grant you a license.
I have never in my life seen a movie theater without a drinking fountain in the lobby. Go to a different theater. How are they supposed to tell it's not vodka? While I applaud your decision to stay at home and watch movies on TV for whatever reason, if you switch to pirated versions you lose all grounds for your moral stance.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "We have to vote for the bill before we can read it." **That** is what the Republicans turned against, not the contents they weren't allowed access too.
Newsflash : you are not living alone on an island but in a society.
Newsflash back at'cha AC. We're not ants or bees either, but a collection of individuals working (ideally not being bludgeoned) to cooperate. I prefer that to living in a drone society - like those bees and ants.
Computer technology was a huge paradigm shift and saw massive growth during the 1970-2000 time period but has now stalled.
**All** tech experiences massive growth in its early years. Locomotives, airplanes, cars, electrical use etc. Then physics exerts controls. And computer tech has by no means stalled.
there are predictions now that human population will max out at 9 billion before starting to plateau or decrease
This is because when a society advances, there is no need or desire for eight or ten children. Also, they no longer have to watch six or seven die. Nothing negative going on at all.
We landed on the moon in 1969 and have made little progress in space colonization since then... If we wanted to develop another heavy-lift rocket we'd have to engineer it from pretty much scratch (as we are in fact doing).
The moon landing wasn't about colonization and our explorations (further and deeper with each year) are preliminary work towards that. No slow down, just a shift of gears from meat. We no longer need the Saturn because our payloads aren't anywhere as large as they used to be. We're not developing new rockets from scratch because we forgot, we're doing it because the old tech is obsolete and being replaced by new tech.
The progress of technology isn't a monotonic upwards curve. It has ups and downs. A lot of indications are that we are now in one of the 'down' periods.
Down in this sense means no advances or even the forgetting of things. Name one field where this is occurring to any significance.
Nice assertion. Explain in detail how, when you're being paid to create something for someone else, you should retain the rights to it *and* the compensation you received.
I'm presuming you'd rather they give their arguments in an echo-proof room instead of in the open where those who disagree are present and can reproach? Hint: It's not about convincing them, it's about preventing them from convincing others.
Have you at all considered that this is a four year old riposte against the "who[le] lot of inappropriate pressure"? **That's** where the hell it came from. I once heard a young child exclaim "But I like cavities!" to get out of brushing her teeth. Shit man, she's four. Don't expect adult reasoning or argumentation from her.
Social studies are meaningless, regardless of which side of the political divide they fall on, because they are simply conclusions searching for data for support. Each and every one is subjective in nature and therefore not science and *therefore* not to be considered as anything other than propaganda.
It is when it works to discourage women who do not fit the stereotypes
Here's a hint to you: You cannot read minds and so have absolutely no idea if those women were discouraged or chose for themselves. You set yourself up as all-knowing and that's simply hubris and false.
My, but aren't you the soft bigot, thinking that women are so shallow that "only boys do that" will convince them that they shouldn't. Whatever drove you to conclude that women are that thoughtless and easily persuaded? That they didn't have minds of their own and buckled to non-peer and peer pressure so easily? Look in the mirror.
No shit. At four my daughter was pretend nursing her baby dolls and told me she wanted to be a nurse or teacher. She's a mother of two, has studied nursing and has become a middle school science teacher with a Masters.
Slashdot Mirror
The opposite is true as well. I spent two decades in banking and ran across many programmers who couldn't for the life of themselves understand the needs and requirements involved. A programmer without the contextual information is just as dangerous.
You sir or madam, do not know what you are talking about as well as being pompous. As long as you can pass the required certification tests, many professions will grant you a license.
I have never in my life seen a movie theater without a drinking fountain in the lobby. Go to a different theater.
How are they supposed to tell it's not vodka? While I applaud your decision to stay at home and watch movies on TV for whatever reason, if you switch to pirated versions you lose all grounds for your moral stance.
Three sentences, three shoulds.
My favorite is the AC troll, pretending his lies are real stories.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "We have to vote for the bill before we can read it." **That** is what the Republicans turned against, not the contents they weren't allowed access too.
Newsflash back at'cha AC. We're not ants or bees either, but a collection of individuals working (ideally not being bludgeoned) to cooperate. I prefer that to living in a drone society - like those bees and ants.
"Reporting facts isnt a sales pitch." Reporting only a portion of the facts is.
Algae blooms are dangerous things. They can kill virtually all fish in the vicinity.
The difference between weather and climate is scale and duration, the length of both depending on your desired goals.
Incorrect, it's at a record high.
**All** tech experiences massive growth in its early years. Locomotives, airplanes, cars, electrical use etc. Then physics exerts controls. And computer tech has by no means stalled.
This is because when a society advances, there is no need or desire for eight or ten children. Also, they no longer have to watch six or seven die. Nothing negative going on at all.
The moon landing wasn't about colonization and our explorations (further and deeper with each year) are preliminary work towards that. No slow down, just a shift of gears from meat. We no longer need the Saturn because our payloads aren't anywhere as large as they used to be. We're not developing new rockets from scratch because we forgot, we're doing it because the old tech is obsolete and being replaced by new tech.
Down in this sense means no advances or even the forgetting of things. Name one field where this is occurring to any significance.
That was phrased that way because /.'s comment system showed your comment under another and it caused a misinterpretation of what you wrote.
Nice assertion. Explain in detail how, when you're being paid to create something for someone else, you should retain the rights to it *and* the compensation you received.
I'm presuming you'd rather they give their arguments in an echo-proof room instead of in the open where those who disagree are present and can reproach? Hint: It's not about convincing them, it's about preventing them from convincing others.
"Smarter" is such a vague term. I've never held much above contempt for IQ tests for that reason. There's so much more.
Have you at all considered that this is a four year old riposte against the "who[le] lot of inappropriate pressure"? **That's** where the hell it came from. I once heard a young child exclaim "But I like cavities!" to get out of brushing her teeth. Shit man, she's four. Don't expect adult reasoning or argumentation from her.
Social studies are meaningless, regardless of which side of the political divide they fall on, because they are simply conclusions searching for data for support. Each and every one is subjective in nature and therefore not science and *therefore* not to be considered as anything other than propaganda.
Here's a hint to you: You cannot read minds and so have absolutely no idea if those women were discouraged or chose for themselves. You set yourself up as all-knowing and that's simply hubris and false.
My, but aren't you the soft bigot, thinking that women are so shallow that "only boys do that" will convince them that they shouldn't. Whatever drove you to conclude that women are that thoughtless and easily persuaded? That they didn't have minds of their own and buckled to non-peer and peer pressure so easily? Look in the mirror.
No shit. At four my daughter was pretend nursing her baby dolls and told me she wanted to be a nurse or teacher. She's a mother of two, has studied nursing and has become a middle school science teacher with a Masters.
Frankly, it's not in your (or anyone's) domain to affect change in either.
Much like a new character in the Marvel Universe.
All this revealed after spending fifteen years on a mountain in contemplation.
Mormanism begs to differ.