The doctor isn't any more likely to have more to offer than anicdotal evidence. Unless they only deal with effects of smoking as part of their career, they give the same general advice you can get from a TV commercial on the subject.
As a buddhist (actually as a human), I do have a natural aversion to violence. The sad state of affairs is such that I cannot see any other resolution. Unless we rid ourselves (litterally) of these bad apples, the desease will continue. The other side of the coin isn't that much brigher though, as another infection will take its place. It is unfortunate that blood must flow (mark my words, eventually, it will), yet it is, ultimately, the human condition. We all seem to want justice, but our error is giving justice to those that deserves none. That is the flaw with political correctness. It mistakes equality for similarity, and we all become victims (including the perpetrators).
Doesn't look like anyone was debating that particular point. Once you've reduced the scope of what the programmer can control, then obviously _their_ code should reflect a proper provable model. But the software is still not (and will not be) 100% bug free, which is the proposed standard of success/failure that seems to propgate this thread.
The test you are proposing will be several generations long. How do you propose to solve the problem of convaying that information _properly_ before nature cuts you off?
Both of the replies miss one crucial point. Human lifespans aren't infinite. We still have to make due within that framework. The alternative is not at all, make your choice!
This is rediculous! You are implying something along the lines of the following: that details about structures of rocket engines, described in terms of their molecules, can be stored in human brain matter. That is insane! On the other hand, you will have the disconnect of two or more minds trying to come to terms with one (the very same) detailed reality, again, insane! Sure, _mathematically_ software has no reason to be mathemtically imperfect. You would be a fool to assume that the human experience is inline with this notion.
If you have an army of super-humans, I mean the kind that have that photographic memory you seem to think is within reason, then by all means, use them. Fact is, buildings, bridges, space shuttles, just about anything, are NOT "bug free," else we souldn't have incidences like this.
I've had a boss like this. His only issue? Didn't know what software is. A good analogy is probably that it is a creature. Like all creatures, software is susseptible to health problems for one reason or another. A shitty doctor could mean the life and death of a patient. A good doctor, at best, can improve your quality of life. Software is not a product. No matter how much one wishes it was. It is a process, a realization of a system. It has no concrete definition. Not unlike life.
Slashdot Mirror
Call us when that day comes. Till then, what's your point?
He's implying that it's non of your fucking business.
Enjoy your ratburger :).
Are you serious?
Hmmm... I wonder where martial arts end up in this landscape...
The doctor isn't any more likely to have more to offer than anicdotal evidence. Unless they only deal with effects of smoking as part of their career, they give the same general advice you can get from a TV commercial on the subject.
More like a rapist. Keeps you alive with all your memories intact, under the pretence of sending you a message.
This only means that we are not equal in the eyes of the law. And suggesting it is a blatant lie.
See the problem?
As a buddhist (actually as a human), I do have a natural aversion to violence. The sad state of affairs is such that I cannot see any other resolution. Unless we rid ourselves (litterally) of these bad apples, the desease will continue. The other side of the coin isn't that much brigher though, as another infection will take its place. It is unfortunate that blood must flow (mark my words, eventually, it will), yet it is, ultimately, the human condition. We all seem to want justice, but our error is giving justice to those that deserves none. That is the flaw with political correctness. It mistakes equality for similarity, and we all become victims (including the perpetrators).
You say this like there is a choice. So choose. Option 1 = turd sandwich. Option 2 = douche bag. Choose.
The two replyes below seem to actually agree with my point. Gentelmen, I believe we are not arguing.
LOL!
Doesn't look like anyone was debating that particular point. Once you've reduced the scope of what the programmer can control, then obviously _their_ code should reflect a proper provable model. But the software is still not (and will not be) 100% bug free, which is the proposed standard of success/failure that seems to propgate this thread.
The test you are proposing will be several generations long. How do you propose to solve the problem of convaying that information _properly_ before nature cuts you off?
Both of the replies miss one crucial point. Human lifespans aren't infinite. We still have to make due within that framework. The alternative is not at all, make your choice!
This is rediculous! You are implying something along the lines of the following: that details about structures of rocket engines, described in terms of their molecules, can be stored in human brain matter. That is insane! On the other hand, you will have the disconnect of two or more minds trying to come to terms with one (the very same) detailed reality, again, insane! Sure, _mathematically_ software has no reason to be mathemtically imperfect. You would be a fool to assume that the human experience is inline with this notion.
If you have an army of super-humans, I mean the kind that have that photographic memory you seem to think is within reason, then by all means, use them. Fact is, buildings, bridges, space shuttles, just about anything, are NOT "bug free," else we souldn't have incidences like this.
I've had a boss like this. His only issue? Didn't know what software is. A good analogy is probably that it is a creature. Like all creatures, software is susseptible to health problems for one reason or another. A shitty doctor could mean the life and death of a patient. A good doctor, at best, can improve your quality of life. Software is not a product. No matter how much one wishes it was. It is a process, a realization of a system. It has no concrete definition. Not unlike life.
They're not related. I find that my motivation (or lack thereof) corresponds more closely to my, already existing, personality.
I'm not so sure about that. There is some ancient wisdom in these words.
Simple, this is how they figure out what the box is.
So, naturally, the alternative is to imagine the answer, not think through the problem. Eh?
Not necessarily. Look up imaginary time.
That document was amusing.
I support GPLv3. I do not believe people should code for free.