IANAP (I Am Not A Physicist), but how the heck can they "find a difference in the [constant]" of speed of light? I thought that the speed of light (c, as they taught me to say) was defined to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. Did somebody one day wake up and go "Aww, some schmuck went ahead and changed the darn definition again" or how exactly does that work?
Is that, like, the equivalent of a Physicist Wiki edit war, but with more committees involved?
I agree, but not completely. Paraphrasing the czech theorist Jan Mukarovsky[1]: art is when the aesthetic function is greater than all other functions.
Therefore, I would conclude that programming per se is not art, but that it very well can be - if intended. Consider the IOCCC. While all competition entries do perform some kind of practical function, the main purpose of each one is to be elegant, beautiful, ingenious etc.; properties which we usually associate with art.[2]
[1] Mukarovsky, Jan, "Aesthetic Function, Norm, and Value as Social Facts.", 1936.
[2] Note to self: I need to learn english grammar and spelling.
I think there is a technique that Scotty forgot to mention (or perhaps didn't know about?).
You can defuse almost any intelligent-yet-idiot-stubborn person by simply asking questions. The questions shouldn't be intricate webs of knowledge or anything like that -- just keep it simple. Because, if it truly is a whacky idea, the smart guy or gal will sooner (if you become versed at this technique) or later arrive at some statements which make no sense at all. And then you go in for the kill (if you are a smart-yet-idiot yourself) or leave a window open for the other person to change their opinion (if you are wise).
Another perk is that you can use the question technique against any type of person. This might seem insignificant, but it is in fact a really important aspect since many of the smart-idiot people have lots of credibility which can make your other chances of winning an argument against them pretty slim. (For some reason, people think that just because you have a PhD in micro biology or theoretical philosophy, you know everything including car repair and hockey tactics.)
Since when is hipocrisy the same thing as irony? Please tell me -- or stop using the word "ironic" every single time somebody is just being a double standard ass.
Irony is an instrument best used by those who know how to subtly mock others.
Wow, it still amazes me how far behind Software Engineering is when compared to the rest of the modern world. I can't think of any other engineering nor scientific disciplin which could get away with stuff like this. You might think that I am a bit harsh, and you are probably right, but let me explain why through an example.
The programmer/homebrew way to solve (or rather, explain away) the Lack of Comment (LoC) problem: "I have worked as an X for Y years and I have found that this and only this works. People shouldn't be so lazy, people are stupid, management is stupid, customers are usually right, the programming languages needs more technical features bla bla bla/../ some more anecdotal 'evidence'."
No, this simply isn't good enough. We have to do better than that. Let's instead try what engineers do best: engineering.
The engineering/positivism way to try to solve LoC: "We first have to realize that there are two different approaches to this problem; the comment writer perpective and the comment reader perspective. We then subdivide each area into a number of distinct sub-cases which..."
While this might seem like a good way to solve a problem such as LoC, we have to realize that we are trying to systematize people. And, as our short and turtle slow SE history will show us, it will simply not work. We are all human beings and cannot be dealt with in this way with any degree of success. What else can we try? Let's go for some other type of science:
The social science/hermenutic way to try to solve LoC:...after completing the survey we chose to interview X number of people in order to find out how each respondant observed the situation where they were to interpret different types of code comments/../ We also discussed the issue with a psychologist and a didactics specialist and we found striking similarities between comment writing and writing tutoring books and..."
Is this the ultimate way to solve problems like this? In all likelyhood no. But I am willing to bet that this is as good as we're going to get at this point in time. And while reading anecdotes can be entertaining, it is still only one persons highly subjective opinion and there is NO WAY that we will advance another centimeter (or inch, for the world standard challenged) if we don't fix this way of thinking about software development issues. Right now.
I like extremists. Not in the direct sense, but in a lot of other ways.
Firstly, they force me evaluate my own beliefs and principles. Why is democracy good? Why is Free Software worth bothering with? What could possibly be wrong with drinking alcohol?
Secondly, most movements in history was seen as radical or just plain whacky. Don't think you are allowed to sit at the front of the bus, woman. Oh no, the sun is clearly rotating around the earth, Mr. Astronomer. Without them, we would still be living in caves and killing our food with spears. No, not even spears, because that guy or gal probably got ridiculed a lot at first. We would be throwing rocks.
Third, the limits of our society are shaped by the extremes on each side of it -- the nuttier the sidelines, the more stable it is in the middle.
Also, some of these dudes are really entertaining, and it is always completely unintentionally...
The second incident happened when I went shopping after spending the day in interviews. I was still in college and this was the first time I had really been out in public while wearing a suit. The level of respect from the sales staffed was an amazing difference from what I was used to. Even average citizens were happen to hold the door open for me.
Actually, I think you forgot to take one important factor into account: Your own behaviour . When you "dress up" in a suit, take a good long shower, have recently gotten a haircut, a shave and put on some after-shave, you start to act differently. You probably act more confident, smile more, look people into their eyes etc. when you feel good about the way you look. The same goes in reverse, of course. When you feel hung-over and have the breath of a rabid dog and just pop out to get a quick snack, wearing what was in the bottom of the basket -- then you're not exactly going to act like you owned the world. And people will treat you differently.
This is, of course, not the only thing that matters. But it plays an important role in the subconscious feedback that we get from other people.
Actually, plupster is correct. The swedish political executive system is a bit different from other countries'. Bodström is NOT allowed to interfere in the daily police work (including picking priorities) as that would be seen as abuse of power and unconstitutional behaviour.
But, well, WTF do I know. I'm just a swede going for a degree in Political Science.
I can buy a song on iTunes for $1 and keep it for the rest of my life, lets just say thats 80 years.
Since the Napster songs go away as soon as you stop subscribing I need to pay $15 a month for the next 80 years. That folks, is $14,400.
Some more math.
Let's assume an inflation adjusted interest rate of 5%. That means that your first song (initial price $1) will now, during the course of your life, cost you: 1 * 1.05^80 ~= $50.
The same goes for your first months subscription of $15: 15 * 1.05^80 ~= $750.
So, which one do you prefer? To pay $50/song or $750 for a months subscription?
Those three letters are probably a very good idea. However, I would like to suggest that you might want to take it even further.
There is a bad academic proverb that a generalist is somebody who knows nothing about lots of things. Well, I would instead say that a generalist is somebody who is really good at two things or more. There aren't that many of "my" generalists around, but those who are make loads of money and get really fun jobs.
I worked as a software developer for something like 4½-5 years without any education. Taking my own advice, I figured that I should get some kind of degree for something completely different. So I applied for a program for a masters degree in Industrial Engineering and Management (the universities in Sweden have a different approach to the education than you do in the U.S.; in short you study directly towards a masters in engineering).
But then I thought, "now I know the technology, the management and the engineering, but something is missing". So I also started going for a paralell bachelors in Political Science which will hopefully give me the two last pieces of the jigzaw puzzle: society and information.
This kind of education will also cover most of the power bases in our society: Economics, Technology, Politics. Or atleast I hope so.
You are correct, but the scale is a bit more fined-grained than that.
I think that many people in the IT business have some kind of project-itis because the only type of operations management (yes, one of the "sciences" under which projects as well as mass production resides) strategy seems to be in project form.
If I was to look for more material outside the thin and narrow environment of software production, I would look into the older and more established industries. They have been doing some kind of organized operations management for somewhere around 100 years now and might have a clue on what to do (and not do).
Other hints may also be provided by the modern, but rooted [privilege access joke goes here], quality assurance community.
I've downloaded quite a few songs illegally in my day, but I have no illusions that what I'm doing is "the right thing." I know it's illegal and I'm not proud of it. I don't think I mind people downloading stuff illegally so much as I mind the people trying to make excuses for it. There is no excuse - what you're doing is immoral and dishonest. We're stealing - not leading a revolution. Get over yourself, folks.
This is the only comment that I have read here that I genuinly dislike.
There are some people who say "you are stealing, it is wrong and you should stop". I can understand that point of view, although I do not agree. They themselves don't copy things because they feel that it is theft. Sure, good for you.
There are others who say "this copyright thing is a sham and who says that copy protection is a God given right and I will copy whatever I want". I don't completely agree with them either, but I understand their point of view also. They copy things and don't feel bad about it. Good for you too.
But I find that you are the only one being immoral. You believe that what you are doing is wrong, wrong, wrong, and still you keep doing it.
From the Declan article: "Cultural differences might explain [the low broadband penetration]. Perhaps Americans prefer to read books instead of staring at a PC? Or they'd rather watch television?"
Yeah, sure.
Or how about this: maybe they just can't afford it? What is a poor family with two (or three -- or four, if they're working double) low incomes going to prioritize away to get $20-40/month extra for that broadband? Do they even have a computer?
Slashdot Mirror
IANAP (I Am Not A Physicist), but how the heck can they "find a difference in the [constant]" of speed of light? I thought that the speed of light (c, as they taught me to say) was defined to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. Did somebody one day wake up and go "Aww, some schmuck went ahead and changed the darn definition again" or how exactly does that work?
Is that, like, the equivalent of a Physicist Wiki edit war, but with more committees involved?
I agree, but not completely. Paraphrasing the czech theorist Jan Mukarovsky[1]: art is when the aesthetic function is greater than all other functions.
Therefore, I would conclude that programming per se is not art, but that it very well can be - if intended. Consider the IOCCC. While all competition entries do perform some kind of practical function, the main purpose of each one is to be elegant, beautiful, ingenious etc.; properties which we usually associate with art.[2]
[1] Mukarovsky, Jan, "Aesthetic Function, Norm, and Value as Social Facts.", 1936.
[2] Note to self: I need to learn english grammar and spelling.
I "designed" a similar system, but for e-mail. Not a single f-cker has commented on it yet, but hey, I'm not dead yet.
I called it Prioritaire.
http://killingmusic.com/blog/index.php?p=4
I think there is a technique that Scotty forgot to mention (or perhaps didn't know about?).
You can defuse almost any intelligent-yet-idiot-stubborn person by simply asking questions. The questions shouldn't be intricate webs of knowledge or anything like that -- just keep it simple. Because, if it truly is a whacky idea, the smart guy or gal will sooner (if you become versed at this technique) or later arrive at some statements which make no sense at all. And then you go in for the kill (if you are a smart-yet-idiot yourself) or leave a window open for the other person to change their opinion (if you are wise).
Another perk is that you can use the question technique against any type of person. This might seem insignificant, but it is in fact a really important aspect since many of the smart-idiot people have lots of credibility which can make your other chances of winning an argument against them pretty slim. (For some reason, people think that just because you have a PhD in micro biology or theoretical philosophy, you know everything including car repair and hockey tactics.)
Is this their final decision?
Or will they have changed their minds by the end of next week, or what?
Since when is hipocrisy the same thing as irony? Please tell me -- or stop using the word "ironic" every single time somebody is just being a double standard ass.
Irony is an instrument best used by those who know how to subtly mock others.
Wow, it still amazes me how far behind Software Engineering is when compared to the rest of the modern world. I can't think of any other engineering nor scientific disciplin which could get away with stuff like this. You might think that I am a bit harsh, and you are probably right, but let me explain why through an example.
/../ some more anecdotal 'evidence'."
...after completing the survey we chose to interview X number of people in order to find out how each respondant observed the situation where they were to interpret different types of code comments /../ We also discussed the issue with a psychologist and a didactics specialist and we found striking similarities between comment writing and writing tutoring books and..."
The programmer/homebrew way to solve (or rather, explain away) the Lack of Comment (LoC) problem: "I have worked as an X for Y years and I have found that this and only this works. People shouldn't be so lazy, people are stupid, management is stupid, customers are usually right, the programming languages needs more technical features bla bla bla
No, this simply isn't good enough. We have to do better than that. Let's instead try what engineers do best: engineering.
The engineering/positivism way to try to solve LoC: "We first have to realize that there are two different approaches to this problem; the comment writer perpective and the comment reader perspective. We then subdivide each area into a number of distinct sub-cases which..."
While this might seem like a good way to solve a problem such as LoC, we have to realize that we are trying to systematize people. And, as our short and turtle slow SE history will show us, it will simply not work. We are all human beings and cannot be dealt with in this way with any degree of success. What else can we try? Let's go for some other type of science:
The social science/hermenutic way to try to solve LoC:
Is this the ultimate way to solve problems like this? In all likelyhood no. But I am willing to bet that this is as good as we're going to get at this point in time. And while reading anecdotes can be entertaining, it is still only one persons highly subjective opinion and there is NO WAY that we will advance another centimeter (or inch, for the world standard challenged) if we don't fix this way of thinking about software development issues. Right now.
I like extremists. Not in the direct sense, but in a lot of other ways.
Firstly, they force me evaluate my own beliefs and principles. Why is democracy good? Why is Free Software worth bothering with? What could possibly be wrong with drinking alcohol?
Secondly, most movements in history was seen as radical or just plain whacky. Don't think you are allowed to sit at the front of the bus, woman. Oh no, the sun is clearly rotating around the earth, Mr. Astronomer. Without them, we would still be living in caves and killing our food with spears. No, not even spears, because that guy or gal probably got ridiculed a lot at first. We would be throwing rocks.
Third, the limits of our society are shaped by the extremes on each side of it -- the nuttier the sidelines, the more stable it is in the middle.
Also, some of these dudes are really entertaining, and it is always completely unintentionally...
I don't "get it". How does "not having anything in the first place" make it cheaper and easier?
One word: Politics.
Government, Corporate, Local... It's all the same in that aspect -- it slows everything the hell down.
Imagine a beowolf cluster of these...
Yeah, I can just feeeeel the awsome computing power equivalent to three gameboys and a HP48 pocket calculator.
The second incident happened when I went shopping after spending the day in interviews. I was still in college and this was the first time I had really been out in public while wearing a suit. The level of respect from the sales staffed was an amazing difference from what I was used to. Even average citizens were happen to hold the door open for me.
Actually, I think you forgot to take one important factor into account: Your own behaviour . When you "dress up" in a suit, take a good long shower, have recently gotten a haircut, a shave and put on some after-shave, you start to act differently. You probably act more confident, smile more, look people into their eyes etc. when you feel good about the way you look. The same goes in reverse, of course. When you feel hung-over and have the breath of a rabid dog and just pop out to get a quick snack, wearing what was in the bottom of the basket -- then you're not exactly going to act like you owned the world. And people will treat you differently.
This is, of course, not the only thing that matters. But it plays an important role in the subconscious feedback that we get from other people.
No, the next insight will be:
Fun fact 3: Adult Americans keep asking what "Bork" means in Swedish.
Actually, plupster is correct. The swedish political executive system is a bit different from other countries'. Bodström is NOT allowed to interfere in the daily police work (including picking priorities) as that would be seen as abuse of power and unconstitutional behaviour.
But, well, WTF do I know. I'm just a swede going for a degree in Political Science.
Fun fact: The Swedish Chef on the Muppet Show doesn't speak any Swedish. At all.
Fun fact 2: Pronunciations such as "Ze" (instead of "The") is a german thing.
I can buy a song on iTunes for $1 and keep it for the rest of my life, lets just say thats 80 years.
Since the Napster songs go away as soon as you stop subscribing I need to pay $15 a month for the next 80 years. That folks, is $14,400.
Some more math.
Let's assume an inflation adjusted interest rate of 5%. That means that your first song (initial price $1) will now, during the course of your life, cost you:
1 * 1.05^80 ~= $50.
The same goes for your first months subscription of $15:
15 * 1.05^80 ~= $750.
So, which one do you prefer? To pay $50/song or $750 for a months subscription?
MBA. You've learned how. Now learn why.
Those three letters are probably a very good idea. However, I would like to suggest that you might want to take it even further.
There is a bad academic proverb that a generalist is somebody who knows nothing about lots of things. Well, I would instead say that a generalist is somebody who is really good at two things or more. There aren't that many of "my" generalists around, but those who are make loads of money and get really fun jobs.
I worked as a software developer for something like 4½-5 years without any education. Taking my own advice, I figured that I should get some kind of degree for something completely different. So I applied for a program for a masters degree in Industrial Engineering and Management (the universities in Sweden have a different approach to the education than you do in the U.S.; in short you study directly towards a masters in engineering).
But then I thought, "now I know the technology, the management and the engineering, but something is missing". So I also started going for a paralell bachelors in Political Science which will hopefully give me the two last pieces of the jigzaw puzzle: society and information.
This kind of education will also cover most of the power bases in our society: Economics, Technology, Politics. Or atleast I hope so.
You are correct, but the scale is a bit more fined-grained than that.
I think that many people in the IT business have some kind of project-itis because the only type of operations management (yes, one of the "sciences" under which projects as well as mass production resides) strategy seems to be in project form.
If I was to look for more material outside the thin and narrow environment of software production, I would look into the older and more established industries. They have been doing some kind of organized operations management for somewhere around 100 years now and might have a clue on what to do (and not do).
Other hints may also be provided by the modern, but rooted [privilege access joke goes here], quality assurance community.
I've downloaded quite a few songs illegally in my day, but I have no illusions that what I'm doing is "the right thing." I know it's illegal and I'm not proud of it. I don't think I mind people downloading stuff illegally so much as I mind the people trying to make excuses for it. There is no excuse - what you're doing is immoral and dishonest. We're stealing - not leading a revolution. Get over yourself, folks.
This is the only comment that I have read here that I genuinly dislike.
There are some people who say "you are stealing, it is wrong and you should stop". I can understand that point of view, although I do not agree. They themselves don't copy things because they feel that it is theft. Sure, good for you.
There are others who say "this copyright thing is a sham and who says that copy protection is a God given right and I will copy whatever I want". I don't completely agree with them either, but I understand their point of view also. They copy things and don't feel bad about it. Good for you too.
But I find that you are the only one being immoral. You believe that what you are doing is wrong, wrong, wrong, and still you keep doing it.
Now THAT, truly, is the lowest of morals.
From the Declan article: "Cultural differences might explain [the low broadband penetration]. Perhaps Americans prefer to read books instead of staring at a PC? Or they'd rather watch television?"
Yeah, sure.
Or how about this: maybe they just can't afford it? What is a poor family with two (or three -- or four, if they're working double) low incomes going to prioritize away to get $20-40/month extra for that broadband? Do they even have a computer?