No one's going to look through history to highlight the crap..
I'm sure throughout history there were tons and tons of crap paintings that no one likes.. and thus never heard of again, but we're left with the truly best that are breathtaking..
Similarly, that's like saying we shouldn't give people easy access to education or the sciences so that they won't become scientists researching crap..
Hey, sometimes it only takes a few, but it's surely a lot easier finding a few when you have tons and tons more.. just laws of averages..
Being a programmer, it also helps if people working above you programmed before.
They'll understand your random screams while debugging, and they'll understand that sometimes debugging will take just a little longer than expected, and that "a little addition" won't be anywhere near that little.
I think everyone programmed a little (to some degree, if even in VBA) just to get a sense of how difficult it is, just to get it work, nevermind design, etc..
Exactly. I'm not a professional photographer (or close), and I've taken quite a few classes back in college. (which on slashdot, allows me to have an opinion!)
I have a Canon Rebel to take pictures during hiking, or for more formal events like weddings and such (but only if they make me!) I also have a Canon SD550 which I'm in love with, because I can put it in my pocket, and take pictures wherever I go, and whenever, because I always have it with me, without carrying around tons of equipment!
Could I bring a Rebel to parties and get away with it? Probably.. but you got to use the right tool for the job!
No terrorist attack = "It was working, see!" Terrorist attacks = "PATRIOT Act wasn't enough, that's why we need PATRIOT Act II!"...
And the other argument that "Hey, (almost) no one you know was a target of the act!" Nevermind that you would never find out if they did, and there are provisions that makes it illegal to talk about it if you got investigated..
"If it does matter though, you want to analyze your code for where the slowdown occurs. Once you isolated the part, you can try several tecniques to speed up your code. Pick the one that runs the fastest."
Really? =)
In any case, computers are fast nowadays, but not nearly fast enough. The difference between an O(N^2) and a O(N^3) or an O(N lg N) algorithm is significant - unless you know for sure that N is never going to get too big. No need to be condescending, but if you only mean linear optimizations, then I mostly agree with you. Otherwise, if you can optimize it by any factor, then by all means, you should.
And also, you can also take the introspective approach - some algorithms work better for certain sizes, so just stitch them together, and use whatever's better for the problem! (ala introsort)
I don't know how you can worry about NP-Complete problems, since they're.. well, NP-Complete. Linear optimizations might mean the difference between say, 100 years and 110 years.. but.. =P (though yes, I'm aware some specific cases have good heuristics and/or pseudo-polynomial Dynamic Programming answers..)
I'm sure I won't be the first one on the forum to say, optimize your algorithm first!
Corporations have been doing it through IMF, WB, WTO, etc.. for years, through it may (or may not, I'm not that up to date) be relatively new to the software industry.
Ya, but they'll be mediocre Harvard graduates with jobs.
Note that I didn't go to an Ivy, but life is a whole lot easier.. if you knew the right people..
And if you knew the right people, it makes it easier to do anything.. for example, if you went to MIT, you're probably going to do research with them in the future, right?
Everyone fluffs their resume, so it's always going to be hard either way..
And if he "brags" about Bittorrent, the Slashdot crowd will call him arrogant...
I agree with you with being more articulate though. I think the standard answer should be to deflect responsibility, just like a politican!
Probably something along the lines of: "It is the responsibility of the individual to decide what he/she wants to do with it. I'm only responsible for discovering new things."
Or maybe even a bit extreme: "Someone can stab someone else to death with a pen. Does that mean pens should've never been invented?" (Or insert something equally trivial..)
Pretty much agree with you there, but want to add one more thing:
It's not what you know, it's who you know.
Being geeks, I know it's sometimes hard to accept this.. but.. well, real world don't care if you accept it or not.. it's just a rule.
Being in a good school just gives you more opportunity to find people who may, say, more likely to be your boss, or help throw a resume in for you, or something. Not to say any other school won't do it, but people always get that sense of being together because they went to the same school - even if it was years and years later, and there would be no interaction otherwise...
The merits of the Electoral College, well, you can read them anywhere, so I won't post something that enough people already flamed enough about...
It's true, we do need a modernize the system. It compels me to say, to a certain degree, "Don't hate the player, hate the game", even if it elects someone I prefer not to see.
But it's unfair to compare the US with other nations - all the infrastructure had to be created from the start. Meanwhile, the "newer" democracies can simply learn from our mistakes, and to know what to look out for, or benefit from the pure fact that they can start from scratch, and not dealing with all the bureaucracy.
I'm simplifying it all quite a bit, but you see what I mean.
Slashdot Mirror
No one's going to look through history to highlight the crap..
I'm sure throughout history there were tons and tons of crap paintings that no one likes.. and thus never heard of again, but we're left with the truly best that are breathtaking..
Similarly, that's like saying we shouldn't give people easy access to education or the sciences so that they won't become scientists researching crap..
Hey, sometimes it only takes a few, but it's surely a lot easier finding a few when you have tons and tons more.. just laws of averages..
Or a stenography + cryptography.. you can just be talking about random crap, while all the work is done in the background..
Being a programmer, it also helps if people working above you programmed before.
They'll understand your random screams while debugging, and they'll understand that sometimes debugging will take just a little longer than expected, and that "a little addition" won't be anywhere near that little.
I think everyone programmed a little (to some degree, if even in VBA) just to get a sense of how difficult it is, just to get it work, nevermind design, etc..
Exactly. I'm not a professional photographer (or close), and I've taken quite a few classes back in college. (which on slashdot, allows me to have an opinion!)
I have a Canon Rebel to take pictures during hiking, or for more formal events like weddings and such (but only if they make me!) I also have a Canon SD550 which I'm in love with, because I can put it in my pocket, and take pictures wherever I go, and whenever, because I always have it with me, without carrying around tons of equipment!
Could I bring a Rebel to parties and get away with it? Probably.. but you got to use the right tool for the job!
Seems like the argument's tipped either way:
...
No terrorist attack = "It was working, see!"
Terrorist attacks = "PATRIOT Act wasn't enough, that's why we need PATRIOT Act II!"
And the other argument that "Hey, (almost) no one you know was a target of the act!" Nevermind that you would never find out if they did, and there are provisions that makes it illegal to talk about it if you got investigated..
Whatever happened to transparency?
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
Is it just me, or the Medium Pace refers to a certain Adam Sandler song as well? =)
People set up dummy companies for tax purposes already. What's to stop them from doing the same for patent purposes?
Talk about unenforceable laws..
"If it does matter though, you want to analyze your code for where the slowdown occurs. Once you isolated the part, you can try several tecniques to speed up your code. Pick the one that runs the fastest."
Really? =)
In any case, computers are fast nowadays, but not nearly fast enough. The difference between an O(N^2) and a O(N^3) or an O(N lg N) algorithm is significant - unless you know for sure that N is never going to get too big. No need to be condescending, but if you only mean linear optimizations, then I mostly agree with you. Otherwise, if you can optimize it by any factor, then by all means, you should.
And also, you can also take the introspective approach - some algorithms work better for certain sizes, so just stitch them together, and use whatever's better for the problem! (ala introsort)
I don't know how you can worry about NP-Complete problems, since they're.. well, NP-Complete. Linear optimizations might mean the difference between say, 100 years and 110 years.. but.. =P (though yes, I'm aware some specific cases have good heuristics and/or pseudo-polynomial Dynamic Programming answers..)
I'm sure I won't be the first one on the forum to say, optimize your algorithm first!
Corporations have been doing it through IMF, WB, WTO, etc.. for years, through it may (or may not, I'm not that up to date) be relatively new to the software industry.
1 5.html
For one example, http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2001/
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/2 2.html
Educate yourself..
> I've observed that math is a really great thing to study if you want a lot of options.
Is that a pun? =) (and it's not too far-fetch since you're talking about economics!)
Ya, but they'll be mediocre Harvard graduates with jobs.
Note that I didn't go to an Ivy, but life is a whole lot easier.. if you knew the right people..
And if you knew the right people, it makes it easier to do anything.. for example, if you went to MIT, you're probably going to do research with them in the future, right?
Everyone fluffs their resume, so it's always going to be hard either way..
I doubt it.
And if he "brags" about Bittorrent, the Slashdot crowd will call him arrogant...
I agree with you with being more articulate though. I think the standard answer should be to deflect responsibility, just like a politican!
Probably something along the lines of:
"It is the responsibility of the individual to decide what he/she wants to do with it. I'm only responsible for discovering new things."
Or maybe even a bit extreme:
"Someone can stab someone else to death with a pen. Does that mean pens should've never been invented?" (Or insert something equally trivial..)
Merit alone, sadly, isn't enough anymore..
It's a good thing no one actually RTFA.. =)
exactly are they getting away with this?
If it's allowed to be reached anyhow.. I have a feeling it's going to be tied down if it's the "next" big thing..
Pretty much agree with you there, but want to add one more thing:
It's not what you know, it's who you know.
Being geeks, I know it's sometimes hard to accept this.. but.. well, real world don't care if you accept it or not.. it's just a rule.
Being in a good school just gives you more opportunity to find people who may, say, more likely to be your boss, or help throw a resume in for you, or something. Not to say any other school won't do it, but people always get that sense of being together because they went to the same school - even if it was years and years later, and there would be no interaction otherwise...
It's all about the networking..
Slippery slope?
Ya, because they might vote for Kerry.
Personally, I think the best part is that it's so easily drawn in. I mean, halfway through or so, I don't even remember noticing that it's all CG!
Contrast to say, Spirit Within, where near the end, the only thing that kept me there was.. oooooo, look at the way that hair move..
The merits of the Electoral College, well, you can read them anywhere, so I won't post something that enough people already flamed enough about...
It's true, we do need a modernize the system. It compels me to say, to a certain degree, "Don't hate the player, hate the game", even if it elects someone I prefer not to see.
But it's unfair to compare the US with other nations - all the infrastructure had to be created from the start. Meanwhile, the "newer" democracies can simply learn from our mistakes, and to know what to look out for, or benefit from the pure fact that they can start from scratch, and not dealing with all the bureaucracy.
I'm simplifying it all quite a bit, but you see what I mean.
The biggest problem is that people are brought up not to question the way things are, on the rationale that "it's the way that it always had been"..
Can't help but quote the Aliens vs Predator movie:
Whoever wins... We lose.