The verb phrase most likely to be applied by the US military to a particular city block in Iraq is "restoring power to". But you can pretend they're vicious indiscriminate killers if it makes you feel better. 'course, they'd be pretty darned incompetent vicious indiscriminate killers since they were able to level cities 60 years ago and, look, plenty of unleveled cities all over the place.
Its almost like they were TRYING to not hit any of the civilians this time...
Was I just imagining those advertisements on Pirate Bay?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Slashdot has some weird thoughts on what moneymaking is.
Host pirated material and charge for ads: OK. Burn pirated material on CD-Rs and charge: OK. Burn pirated material on CD-Rs and put it in a shrinkwrapped box: WTF NOT OK THAT IS THEFT!!!
It makes me think that Microsoft et al need to invest more in PBRM: Pretty Box Rights Management. More of you guys would probably actually give a care then.
reinstalled? How often is that, really? I'm chief tech support for my family and the last time I reinstalled Windows was 1996, something like 45 computer-years ago. I have honestly had more occasions to wipe Linux systems (twice since '96), although that was because of botched userland software installs early enough in the life of the PC that wiping would be faster than figuring how to revert every change made during the install.
... the system isn't the attacker. The end user is the attacker. (Sidenote: if you are using an email system over a dedicated client which was provided for you to ensure system security, accountability, and auditing compliance, you a) aren't using email, sorry and b) presumably knew what you were getting into when you signed up.)
P.S. Wouldn't sending a letter in WoW fall under a "more dangerous class of trackers", since one entity knows the sent and received states of all messages on the system and can view them at will? (Oh noes!) Ditto with AIM... and Facebook... and MySpace... and...
... I fail to see how a lock which is inferior to existing locks in every possible way AND is not cool, unless you are a four year old who has just learned the word "blue", is in any way interesting. Aside from "count how many extra attacks and failure modes we make possible just by mapping a numeric key to color codes".
Failure mode: You can remember numbers in a sequence much better than you can remember colors, because you've been taught forever that numbers are sequential data and colors have never been taught to you that way aside from the rainbow. (Which you have to remember with a mnemonic anyway, despite it being the ONE color sequence you will ever learn in your life!)
Failure mode: Color blind people, a non-trivial percent of the population. (Folks with generically impaired vision, too, since it is presumably harder to make the order of cycled colors obvious than it is to make the order of cycled numbers obvious.)
... but the grandparent might have violated a kiddie porn statute or two by encoding a string and then distributing a message which includes the substring "13 rape".
(No, he didn't, really. But it makes you wonder, because "13 rape.jpg" attached to a random photo from your family's digital camera almost certainly runs afoul of at least one kiddie porn statute: it "purports" to be pornography, and if you distribute or possess it that's all she wrote for you, bub.)
Theory of indulgences: somebody somewhere is doing good, you've got money, why don't you buy a bit of excess "good" with your money. (The excess "good" was Jesus' "Treasury of Merit", on the theory that since he was basically infinitely good you couldn't tap him out just by drawing out a finite amount to expiate your sin of choice.)
Theory of carbon offsets: somebody somewhere is doing good, you've got money, why don't you buy a bit of excess "good" with your money.
Because instead of paying for earthquake or flood insurance, something which is well-understood and known to work against hazards which happen infrequently, we want to spend about $10,000 a pound to lift the entire facility into orbit, where it will be exposed to total-loss failure constantly, for the life of the facility. But with the $20 billion terrestrial plant moved into space at the costs of hundreds of billions of dollars, at least it will be secure from floods and earthquakes! We'll just replace the miniscule threat of floods/earthquakes with the threat of, well, whatever kills it will probably be pretty unique -- a miniscule design flaw in a pressure seal, a one-off bug in control code, there are a billion possible things that can go wrong and they all spell TIME FOR A NEW PLANT. And estimating that risk? Well, assuming we're as "successful" protecting the fab plant as we are at protecting our shuttle pilots, there will only be a 2% chance or so of each flight to it blowing up.
You might think that this would take ungodly amounts of image recognition technology. And that is true, for the general case of "Import any image into Spore". But given that you have procedural creature generation, all you have to do is ship the Creature Creator with as many critters as you want to be discoverable (cheap to you: its just a list of parameters), give them all a unique ID, and then make sure your website serves up thumbnails with the ID embedded in the filename. The ID essentially serves as an unlock code for content which was already on the CD/download/etc.
(Alternatively, for extra robustness, you write the ID in the thumbnail somewhere -- there is plenty of dead space in the PNG specification.)
Then the user sees the import process work and is like "Wowza, you could read in pictures!" All of the joy of implementing a full scanning engine, none of the work.
Everyone playing WoW says "No, thanks". The key to all of the nostalgia for UO and its ilk is the presence of an underclass of gankees that the nostalgiac could prey upon... but these days the gankees have other outlets where they can have all the socialization and grind without getting their face pounded at least once a play session.
"Player agency" means the ability to inflict yourself on other people. Thanks, I'm going to take a pass on that one.
Its only after he is tenured (depends on the school system, could take a year or three) that he is unfireable deadweight for life (or until he gets a student pregnant... and even then I'd give him better than even odds in NYC). Until he gets tenured, he "merely" gets a union and an absolutely byzantine system of grievance protections to keep his lousy carcass in the job.
New York City decides to fire a 5 year veteran (tenured after 3) for gross incompetence. Costs $250k, 2 years.
The Internet is a wide open place. Software testing is inadequate. I'm sure there is no way you could possibly have known that when combined with that patch from the florist in Scotland, your code could possibly overwrite a few bytes of memory if called with an unlikely sequence of parameters. Whoops, I clobbered the userid? How silly of me.
Alternatively, accomplish the same thing via 2+ patches to 2+ projects which are likely to be used together. One patch against httpd + one patch against php = potential for a lot of mischief. Its not hard to fit a key to a lock when you're allowed to modify both the key and the lock to suit your tastes.
It means that I never have to go back to the video store. That is worth a 4x price premium for me. (Oh noes, my entertainment costs increased for $.50 to $2 an hour... oh, phew, not a starving college kid anymore so that difference is no longer supremely important to me.)
It means I never have to worry about forgetting to go back to the video store (I let two months worth of rental time rot because I just got busy and forgot about movies for a while -- the rental *store* would have charged me boku bucks and sent nastygrams to get their property back, the rental *service* put a little sticker on my database record saying We Love You Man Feel Free To Keep Paying $20 A Month As Long As You Want).
It means I never have to worry about finding time to go to the video store on a day where I just don't have the freaking time. (See point #2.) Sometimes life gets busy and when life gets busy "Drats, I need to return these DVDs" is not a worry I want to have.
(My $20 a month plan is for the Japanese equivalent of Netflix -- 2 DVDs at a time, capped at 8 cycles a month. I rarely use anything close to my allotment. I prefer (legal) downloads to renting, honestly, but much of what I want to see is not available in that format.)
... but I burned about 16 hours of company time last week trying to do the following:
1) Have a.rb script written in UTF-8, with Japanese in it. 2) Read in a files written in a mix of UTF-8 and SJIS (a legacy Japanese encoding which is quite common here) 3) Do some really freaking simple text munging. 4) Write out to a new file in SJIS, for exporting to another system
Sixteen. Freaking. Hours.
Among the numerous issues I learned the hard way (previously all of my Rails experience had been in the mystical wonderland of ASCII and all of my i18n experience had been in Java, so I had never seen problems like this before):
1) Running regexps on strings. I naiively assumed that you could actually, you know, do it. As it turns out, you have to first convert the encoding of the regexp and the encoding of the string such that they match, otherwise you get program killing errors. This was sort of a newbie mistake -- I figured that Ruby, with its "keep it easy" credo, would do things fairly transparently like Java does. Instead, I have to manually identify all entrance points of text into the system, and do the encoding to UTF-8 internally there, then do the encoding to the target encoding at all the output points. As you can imagine, this isn't the world's most maintainable solution, since all it takes is one other member of my team to refactor a file and forget to include the magic encoding comment at the top (thus letting encoding fall to the system default) and then we've got little SJIS gremlins running around internally wreaking havoc with our data.
2) Try opening a file for writing as SJIS in a script written in UTF-8
You'll get an error saying that you can't transcode between ASCII-8BIT (what the 2009 starts as, after it gets munged into a string) and SJIS, which you've declared as the file encoding. Never mind that a) the transcoding is bitwise identical in this case and b) yes, you freaking machine, I damn well CAN transcode between those two because if I can't then Japan is "#$"#ed.
3) Documentation. One of my favorite hobbyhorses with Rails, and I love that framework, is that documentation is sparse, outdated, and disorganized. Ruby 1.9 deals with the issue of sparse, outdated, and disorganized documentation by dispensing with it entirely, for minor features like Unicode support, which was theoretically the major advance. (Its possible I merely missed the documentation because my Japanese Google-fu is insufficient, but I really feel for those saps out there who need to support languages which aren't Japanese.)
About the only helpful things I found were blog posts and mailing list archives which detailed the somewhat idiosyncratic relationship between
a) the magic comment b) the -K and -E command line parameters c) the system default encoding
in determining what encoding strings actually end up as. I have still not been able to re-find where I learned about the File.open(filename, "w:SJIS") syntax. There does not appear to be any comprehensive official list of changes. Rather, the best I was able to do was a blog post featuring (I kid you not) the results of one guy grep'ping changelogs looking for things that looked related to 1.9 and collecting them in one place.
Oh boy, was Friday frustrating. And I get to do it again today. Fun stuff.
Well there go my dinner plans. Thanks a lot, Slashdot.
(OK, for those of us who are not materials scientists: its the chemical equivalent of D&D's old Dust of Dryness. You know, does 6D6 if sprinkled on a water elemental, or draws the water out of what it touches on the way down if you eat it. Not too likely to be fatal, though, unless you swallow it in quantities large enough to make table salt fatal. The MSDS says emergency treatment is "drink two glasses of water and then induce vomiting".)
Any more than most programmers need the ability to write legal briefs. Sure, you should know what a legal brief *is*, like a lawyer should know, in a vague sense, that computers have instructions which they follow. But do you need to actually spend a LOT of effort learning how to write the simplest possible functional legal brief, when you will never have to do it in your life? (Because if you DO have to have one written, you have a salary to hire a lawyer on your behalf, and he will do it faster, better, and more accurately than you can. Specialization -- its not just for insects.)
Incidentally, like teaching a lawyer programming, much of what you'll learn to write that simple legal brief is particularized trivia which is not about legal briefs so much as it is about the environment you are working in. For example, you'll have to deal with the size of paper the local court will accept, what the proper syntax for pleadings is, etc etc. This is important trivia for lawyers but doesn't increase your understanding of legal briefs as a class of knowledge, much like the difference between
public class Rectangle {/* big snip */
public int area() { return length * width; } }
and
class Rectangle
#big snip
def area
length * width
end end
is very important to programmers but doesn't teach you anything about programming as a field of knowledge.
They killed Matt Damon and Leonardo de Caprio. Its the happiest ending I've seen since Titanic, which only killed one of the two, but sort of poisoned the festive mood with thousands of people (who weren't Leonardo di Caprio) dying in the background.
Now how is Hollywood going to top that... I have an idea: Oceans 14. We put in Matt Damon, Leonardo de Caprio, George Clooney, and any many who has ever even considered being in an "Oceans #{i += 1}" movie, and then at the end of the daring casino caper we kill them all. I would pay to see that twice, and then buy the DVD so I could skip straight to the good part.
In fact, forget the casino caper, that part tends to drag anyhow. Tell you what -- they break in 2 seconds into the movie, it turns out the pit boss is River Tam, and the next 90 minutes is filled with non-stop star killing.
"Go ahead, take a bit of the apple. There is more than one way to do it."
Next thing you know there are two naked Perl programmers standing around, who quite sensibly made the decision to cover up because "naked Perl programmer" is a scary, scary concept.
Slashdot Mirror
The verb phrase most likely to be applied by the US military to a particular city block in Iraq is "restoring power to". But you can pretend they're vicious indiscriminate killers if it makes you feel better. 'course, they'd be pretty darned incompetent vicious indiscriminate killers since they were able to level cities 60 years ago and, look, plenty of unleveled cities all over the place.
Its almost like they were TRYING to not hit any of the civilians this time...
Mac: Oh %$#& %$#& %$#& %$#&.
PC: I can relate.
Mac: No!! %$#& %$#& %$#&
PC: Don't feel so glum, Mac, it happens to everyone once in a while. Look at it this way -- its a sign you're growing up.
Mac: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
PC: You know, they can do wonderful things these days with firewall software.
Mac: I want to cut myself.
PC: Not a good idea as a root user, Mac.
Mac: *glowers*
PC: I only kid because I love you.
Was I just imagining those advertisements on Pirate Bay?
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Slashdot has some weird thoughts on what moneymaking is.
Host pirated material and charge for ads: OK.
Burn pirated material on CD-Rs and charge: OK.
Burn pirated material on CD-Rs and put it in a shrinkwrapped box: WTF NOT OK THAT IS THEFT!!!
It makes me think that Microsoft et al need to invest more in PBRM: Pretty Box Rights Management. More of you guys would probably actually give a care then.
reinstalled? How often is that, really? I'm chief tech support for my family and the last time I reinstalled Windows was 1996, something like 45 computer-years ago. I have honestly had more occasions to wipe Linux systems (twice since '96), although that was because of botched userland software installs early enough in the life of the PC that wiping would be faster than figuring how to revert every change made during the install.
... and not, oh, an integrated diabetes management system, pill dispenser, etc...
... the system isn't the attacker. The end user is the attacker. (Sidenote: if you are using an email system over a dedicated client which was provided for you to ensure system security, accountability, and auditing compliance, you a) aren't using email, sorry and b) presumably knew what you were getting into when you signed up.)
P.S. Wouldn't sending a letter in WoW fall under a "more dangerous class of trackers", since one entity knows the sent and received states of all messages on the system and can view them at will? (Oh noes!) Ditto with AIM... and Facebook... and MySpace... and...
>>
dopant migration in the semiconductor heterojunctiontions
>>
Hire this guy. Now. He makes your "tachyon pulses" look like the deranged ramblings of a man-child.
... I fail to see how a lock which is inferior to existing locks in every possible way AND is not cool, unless you are a four year old who has just learned the word "blue", is in any way interesting. Aside from "count how many extra attacks and failure modes we make possible just by mapping a numeric key to color codes".
Failure mode: You can remember numbers in a sequence much better than you can remember colors, because you've been taught forever that numbers are sequential data and colors have never been taught to you that way aside from the rainbow. (Which you have to remember with a mnemonic anyway, despite it being the ONE color sequence you will ever learn in your life!)
Failure mode: Color blind people, a non-trivial percent of the population. (Folks with generically impaired vision, too, since it is presumably harder to make the order of cycled colors obvious than it is to make the order of cycled numbers obvious.)
... but the grandparent might have violated a kiddie porn statute or two by encoding a string and then distributing a message which includes the substring "13 rape".
(No, he didn't, really. But it makes you wonder, because "13 rape.jpg" attached to a random photo from your family's digital camera almost certainly runs afoul of at least one kiddie porn statute: it "purports" to be pornography, and if you distribute or possess it that's all she wrote for you, bub.)
Theory of indulgences: somebody somewhere is doing good, you've got money, why don't you buy a bit of excess "good" with your money. (The excess "good" was Jesus' "Treasury of Merit", on the theory that since he was basically infinitely good you couldn't tap him out just by drawing out a finite amount to expiate your sin of choice.)
Theory of carbon offsets: somebody somewhere is doing good, you've got money, why don't you buy a bit of excess "good" with your money.
Because instead of paying for earthquake or flood insurance, something which is well-understood and known to work against hazards which happen infrequently, we want to spend about $10,000 a pound to lift the entire facility into orbit, where it will be exposed to total-loss failure constantly, for the life of the facility. But with the $20 billion terrestrial plant moved into space at the costs of hundreds of billions of dollars, at least it will be secure from floods and earthquakes! We'll just replace the miniscule threat of floods/earthquakes with the threat of, well, whatever kills it will probably be pretty unique -- a miniscule design flaw in a pressure seal, a one-off bug in control code, there are a billion possible things that can go wrong and they all spell TIME FOR A NEW PLANT. And estimating that risk? Well, assuming we're as "successful" protecting the fab plant as we are at protecting our shuttle pilots, there will only be a 2% chance or so of each flight to it blowing up.
And we're doing this to... save money.
You might think that this would take ungodly amounts of image recognition technology. And that is true, for the general case of "Import any image into Spore". But given that you have procedural creature generation, all you have to do is ship the Creature Creator with as many critters as you want to be discoverable (cheap to you: its just a list of parameters), give them all a unique ID, and then make sure your website serves up thumbnails with the ID embedded in the filename. The ID essentially serves as an unlock code for content which was already on the CD/download/etc.
(Alternatively, for extra robustness, you write the ID in the thumbnail somewhere -- there is plenty of dead space in the PNG specification.)
Then the user sees the import process work and is like "Wowza, you could read in pictures!" All of the joy of implementing a full scanning engine, none of the work.
...or MySpace, but whatever it was, buddy, get help.
Everyone playing WoW says "No, thanks". The key to all of the nostalgia for UO and its ilk is the presence of an underclass of gankees that the nostalgiac could prey upon... but these days the gankees have other outlets where they can have all the socialization and grind without getting their face pounded at least once a play session.
"Player agency" means the ability to inflict yourself on other people. Thanks, I'm going to take a pass on that one.
Its only after he is tenured (depends on the school system, could take a year or three) that he is unfireable deadweight for life (or until he gets a student pregnant... and even then I'd give him better than even odds in NYC). Until he gets tenured, he "merely" gets a union and an absolutely byzantine system of grievance protections to keep his lousy carcass in the job.
New York City decides to fire a 5 year veteran (tenured after 3) for gross incompetence. Costs $250k, 2 years.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05272008/news/regionalnews/253g_to_fire_one_teacher_112703.htm
A flow chart of what you need to do to fire a NYC teacher. Warning: PDF. And its big, and I'm not talking file size.
http://oldsite.reason.com/0610/howtofireanincompetentteacher.pdf
...blocking Bittorrent isn't a bug, it is a feature.
The Internet is a wide open place. Software testing is inadequate. I'm sure there is no way you could possibly have known that when combined with that patch from the florist in Scotland, your code could possibly overwrite a few bytes of memory if called with an unlikely sequence of parameters. Whoops, I clobbered the userid? How silly of me.
Alternatively, accomplish the same thing via 2+ patches to 2+ projects which are likely to be used together. One patch against httpd + one patch against php = potential for a lot of mischief. Its not hard to fit a key to a lock when you're allowed to modify both the key and the lock to suit your tastes.
It means that I never have to go back to the video store. That is worth a 4x price premium for me. (Oh noes, my entertainment costs increased for $.50 to $2 an hour... oh, phew, not a starving college kid anymore so that difference is no longer supremely important to me.)
It means I never have to worry about forgetting to go back to the video store (I let two months worth of rental time rot because I just got busy and forgot about movies for a while -- the rental *store* would have charged me boku bucks and sent nastygrams to get their property back, the rental *service* put a little sticker on my database record saying We Love You Man Feel Free To Keep Paying $20 A Month As Long As You Want).
It means I never have to worry about finding time to go to the video store on a day where I just don't have the freaking time. (See point #2.) Sometimes life gets busy and when life gets busy "Drats, I need to return these DVDs" is not a worry I want to have.
(My $20 a month plan is for the Japanese equivalent of Netflix -- 2 DVDs at a time, capped at 8 cycles a month. I rarely use anything close to my allotment. I prefer (legal) downloads to renting, honestly, but much of what I want to see is not available in that format.)
... a computer.
Film at 11.
... but I burned about 16 hours of company time last week trying to do the following:
.rb script written in UTF-8, with Japanese in it.
1) Have a
2) Read in a files written in a mix of UTF-8 and SJIS (a legacy Japanese encoding which is quite common here)
3) Do some really freaking simple text munging.
4) Write out to a new file in SJIS, for exporting to another system
Sixteen. Freaking. Hours.
Among the numerous issues I learned the hard way (previously all of my Rails experience had been in the mystical wonderland of ASCII and all of my i18n experience had been in Java, so I had never seen problems like this before):
1) Running regexps on strings. I naiively assumed that you could actually, you know, do it. As it turns out, you have to first convert the encoding of the regexp and the encoding of the string such that they match, otherwise you get program killing errors. This was sort of a newbie mistake -- I figured that Ruby, with its "keep it easy" credo, would do things fairly transparently like Java does. Instead, I have to manually identify all entrance points of text into the system, and do the encoding to UTF-8 internally there, then do the encoding to the target encoding at all the output points. As you can imagine, this isn't the world's most maintainable solution, since all it takes is one other member of my team to refactor a file and forget to include the magic encoding comment at the top (thus letting encoding fall to the system default) and then we've got little SJIS gremlins running around internally wreaking havoc with our data.
2) Try opening a file for writing as SJIS in a script written in UTF-8
output_file = File.open("sample.txt", "w:SJIS") #this is Ruby 1.9
output_file.puts Date.today.year # 2009
output_file.close
You'll get an error saying that you can't transcode between ASCII-8BIT (what the 2009 starts as, after it gets munged into a string) and SJIS, which you've declared as the file encoding. Never mind that a) the transcoding is bitwise identical in this case and b) yes, you freaking machine, I damn well CAN transcode between those two because if I can't then Japan is "#$"#ed.
3) Documentation. One of my favorite hobbyhorses with Rails, and I love that framework, is that documentation is sparse, outdated, and disorganized. Ruby 1.9 deals with the issue of sparse, outdated, and disorganized documentation by dispensing with it entirely, for minor features like Unicode support, which was theoretically the major advance. (Its possible I merely missed the documentation because my Japanese Google-fu is insufficient, but I really feel for those saps out there who need to support languages which aren't Japanese.)
About the only helpful things I found were blog posts and mailing list archives which detailed the somewhat idiosyncratic relationship between
a) the magic comment
b) the -K and -E command line parameters
c) the system default encoding
in determining what encoding strings actually end up as. I have still not been able to re-find where I learned about the File.open(filename, "w:SJIS") syntax. There does not appear to be any comprehensive official list of changes. Rather, the best I was able to do was a blog post featuring (I kid you not) the results of one guy grep'ping changelogs looking for things that looked related to 1.9 and collecting them in one place.
Oh boy, was Friday frustrating. And I get to do it again today. Fun stuff.
Well there go my dinner plans. Thanks a lot, Slashdot.
(OK, for those of us who are not materials scientists: its the chemical equivalent of D&D's old Dust of Dryness. You know, does 6D6 if sprinkled on a water elemental, or draws the water out of what it touches on the way down if you eat it. Not too likely to be fatal, though, unless you swallow it in quantities large enough to make table salt fatal. The MSDS says emergency treatment is "drink two glasses of water and then induce vomiting".)
Although all three of them beat the freaking snot out of putting a CD in the drive.
Any more than most programmers need the ability to write legal briefs. Sure, you should know what a legal brief *is*, like a lawyer should know, in a vague sense, that computers have instructions which they follow. But do you need to actually spend a LOT of effort learning how to write the simplest possible functional legal brief, when you will never have to do it in your life? (Because if you DO have to have one written, you have a salary to hire a lawyer on your behalf, and he will do it faster, better, and more accurately than you can. Specialization -- its not just for insects.)
/* big snip */
Incidentally, like teaching a lawyer programming, much of what you'll learn to write that simple legal brief is particularized trivia which is not about legal briefs so much as it is about the environment you are working in. For example, you'll have to deal with the size of paper the local court will accept, what the proper syntax for pleadings is, etc etc. This is important trivia for lawyers but doesn't increase your understanding of legal briefs as a class of knowledge, much like the difference between
public class Rectangle {
public int area() { return length * width; }
}
and
class Rectangle
#big snip
def area
length * width
end
end
is very important to programmers but doesn't teach you anything about programming as a field of knowledge.
They killed Matt Damon and Leonardo de Caprio. Its the happiest ending I've seen since Titanic, which only killed one of the two, but sort of poisoned the festive mood with thousands of people (who weren't Leonardo di Caprio) dying in the background.
Now how is Hollywood going to top that... I have an idea: Oceans 14. We put in Matt Damon, Leonardo de Caprio, George Clooney, and any many who has ever even considered being in an "Oceans #{i += 1}" movie, and then at the end of the daring casino caper we kill them all. I would pay to see that twice, and then buy the DVD so I could skip straight to the good part.
In fact, forget the casino caper, that part tends to drag anyhow. Tell you what -- they break in 2 seconds into the movie, it turns out the pit boss is River Tam, and the next 90 minutes is filled with non-stop star killing.
Perl.
"Go ahead, take a bit of the apple. There is more than one way to do it."
Next thing you know there are two naked Perl programmers standing around, who quite sensibly made the decision to cover up because "naked Perl programmer" is a scary, scary concept.