Yes, it is a duplicate entry because editors don't do their job...
You're assuming a Slashdot editor's job is to prevent dupes.
I would argue that their job is to post stories which generate site traffic.
If a dupe is posted which generates a healthy discussion in addition to the flurry of free 'It's a dupe!' posts, then that's a job well done.
As important as testing is, many clients (at least the ones I've dealt with) are willing to place testing on the back burner in turn for more output for the same amount of money. If code works right 95% of the time on the first try, that is a sacrifice they are willing to make. Obviously the more critical the product, the more testing is required.
Yeah, but what is proper testing? Nowadays, really good testing needs to be an ongoing part of the development process. Everything the client sees, even the first demo, should have gone through an organized series of tests. Unfortunately, when a client, and even sometimes managers or any other non-techie, really, sees something doing something, they think those features are 'done'. Developers cannot let themselves be caught in that trap, so they need to test as they go.
The quality of software has been continually declining for the last decade, I think.
Software Engineering is making leaps and bounds, so there are many tools available for writing good software. The people who really know what they are doing have more at their disposal. However, more than ever, there are a very large number of incompetent developers out there. It's much easier to get into programming now than it was in the machine language/assembly/C days because things are much easier to use, and the tools are much more accessible. Combine that with the.com influx of bozos and you have alot of people spewing out crap code.
Why does it seem like unit testing is only taught in Java programming courses? I have never seen this in any C/C++, C# or Visual Basic courses.
Blame it on JUnit. Since it provides a way to make unit testing easier, it's easier to get people to actually do it. When I was in school, we talked about unit testing, but never really did it very well. By employing the latest buzzwords such as JUnit and Spring in your design, it's much less work to build your unit tests that it would be with other languages.
I also think, for better or worse, the the Java community is much more open to the latest toys than users of the other established languages are, which may explain why the XUnit variants in other languages haven't taken off as well.
Wow, it's nice to see that you've done a good job of surpressing yourself.
Who needs to bother creating a Big Brother when the cowards take care of themselves?
Before anyone sets up any kind of web site, I strongly advise you to purchase an Umbrella Liabliity Insurance Policy. Among other things, these policies protect you from accusations of libel and slander. While truth is an absolute defense against libel or slander, you don't want it to cost you your life savings to defend against a frivolous lawsuit because you spoke the truth someone didn't want to hear. For the cost of the umbrella policy - typically around $300 per year you can virtually stop any potential frivolous lawsuit. Such lawsuits are designed to intimidate the little guy and you're much less of a little guy when a multi-billion dollar insurance company is the one that is paying to defend you against the suit.
hmmm.... lets fix this one
Before anyone sets up any kind of web site, I strongly advise you to research an Umbrella Liabliity Insurance Policy. Among other things, these policies may protect you from accusations of libel and slander. While proof is a defense against libel or slander, you don't want it to cost you your life savings to defend against a frivolous lawsuit because you spoke the truth someone didn't want to hear. For the cost of the umbrella policy - typically around $300 per year you can possibly prevent any potential frivolous lawsuit. Such lawsuits are designed to intimidate the little guy and you're much less of a little guy when you have adequate protection.
ahh much better. Only thing worse than financial disaster is financial disaster after you realize your poorly researched insurance policies really don't help you in your case
Hmm... since we've already had today's Sony DRM article... lemme check my Slashdot manual...
flip, flip, flip... ahhh here it is...
Yes, since we've alreay had today's Sony DRM article, the newer Sony "Defender of Freedom" article means that we must express undying love for Sony until the posting of tomorrow's Sony DRM article.
You should try World of Warcraft. You can play at a leisurely pace and not have to worry about getting sucked in.
Definitely the game for RPG fans with busy lives.
It's very simple. CFO stands for "Chief of Fucking Off." Their job is to get hired, sit around for a few days, and then fuck off and look somewhere else for a job.
Sounds like most of the programmers I've worked with over the years. Similar to the sysadmins too, however they download porn instead of looking for jobs.
Ajax, or 'Asynchronous JavaScript and XML,' is allowing webpages to update as quickly as desktop software
Wow, and with the XML you can make it automatically talk to any system!!!!
e-Business has reached a new plateau! Synergy abounds! Am I e-dreaming or what! Woohoo!!
I spent 3 seconds on the arstechnica article posted and see that Microsoft has two options
1) Ship a boatload at once, then have a period where none are available
2) Stream out the shipments so that a constant, but limited supply are available
They saw from the PS2 launch, that the public reaction to option 1 wasn't very good.
So....they choose option 2.
It's a business choice made when weighing manufacturing constraints vs customer reactions.
Of course Slashdot wants to hype this up as yet another reason why Microsoft is evil, and people are biting.
Tell me, which organization here is the one playing psych games with their customers?
From your post it is obvious that you are at best vaguely familar with the topics you speak of.
Well, to be honest, I really have no clue about the sort of systems that the ESA builds, so I was really stretching there. However, I'm not backing down on the argument that you cannot do a mathematical proof which guarantees that a complex piece of software is bug free. You can define a set of conditions and prove that the code works against those conditions, but you can never slap on the 100% bug free label.
No - I have a colleague, that used to work for ESA. Proving that software really works as it's supposed to do, is something you do, when you cannot afford the consequence of failure (eg. loss of human life, or perhaps even worse: bad PR...).
Now, my question for you folks: Could Java afford a failure in this area, or should SUN do what it takes?
I think you're really just trying to play the evil and incompetent big bisuness FUD card. How do you know Sun isn't doing this already? Also, you're still making the highly flawed assumption that proving that code works guarentees that it is bug free, and makes community testing irrelevent.
In the applications you're talking about, the environment is highly controlled. Often the hardware and software are specially designed for the system. The software is usually embedded, and has very limited responsibilities and highly controlled inputs. In those cases, you can create a pretty good model of the system, and do pretty good proofs about the code. Its very expensive, but people can be confident about the process. Still not perfect, because again, the sceintists need to create model of the real world, and models are a finite description of an infinite thing.
Now, going to Sun and Java, they have a highly uncontrolled environment. Their software needs to work securely on spyware infested Windows machines. They can't possible prove everything because they don't know all the influences on their software. Also, the proof process becomes much more complex multithreaded systems. Other threads or processes may change your invariants, which hoses your proof. Again, you can and should for important apps, still throw math at it, however, nothing elimates the usefulness of community testing.
Yes they can, it's the mathematical proof of a software.
It's tough, time consuming, very expensive and requires *the horror* the actual usage of mathematicians, but it is possible to prove a software.
No you can't. You can get really close though.
Mathematics is not a description of how things work, it is only a model of how things work. When you toss it at your code, you still need to make assumptions about the environment which you are proving in. Again, to do these proofs, you need to make a model of the application working in the real world. You can pound out proofs all day about your code, but they will be crap if your underlying assumptions are wrong.
A really really good mathematician can make really really good assumptions and do a really really good verification of the software, but that is in no way a guarentee that the software is bug free.
Why not do what it takes: Prove that it will work, and prove that it cannot be broken!
Did you just walk out of an undergrad Computer Science class?;)
Popping in pre/postconditions and doing line-by-line proofs doesn't cut it for an application of this complexity. While that is an important part of a real process, it doesn't guarentee coverage. You still have to make assumptions about the environment, which is the gotcha. Testing and QA is all about the assumptions you make and the boundaries you set. With a complex application the number of factors grows so large, that you cannot have the resources to cover every possible test. You can grab the most common stuff, but really need to dump it to the community to get the real 'out of the box' thinking hitting it.
I'd just be happy if they got one step closer, and this work can be built upon. No one will ever 'get it', only because human language right now is too ambiguous. They'll get close enough to be useful though.
However, my vision of the future is where human language and thinking actually adapts to the computers and becomes more formalized. The languages will be tightened up by standards committees and taught in schools as the official languages. After a few generations there will be a much greater harmony between computers and people.
Slashdot Mirror
More likely, however, is that the X360 is just crap, and you should wait for either a Revolution or PS3.
Well we can all agree on that one!
Sounds like someone needs to improve their driving skills and stop blaming the system.
Nah it's just their new 4th dimension virutal reality feature.
Oh, and I HIGHLY recommend you don't play Mortal Kombat.
It sounds like either the dev kits weren't in sync with production units, or someone as MS decided to add a last minute DRM to the BIOS.
It sounds like you're just making shit up.
Yes, it is a duplicate entry because editors don't do their job...
You're assuming a Slashdot editor's job is to prevent dupes.
I would argue that their job is to post stories which generate site traffic.
If a dupe is posted which generates a healthy discussion in addition to the flurry of free 'It's a dupe!' posts, then that's a job well done.
Imagine hordes of these running fearless into machinegun fire... Very effective, I presume....
Been there, done that. We called it World War I
As important as testing is, many clients (at least the ones I've dealt with) are willing to place testing on the back burner in turn for more output for the same amount of money. If code works right 95% of the time on the first try, that is a sacrifice they are willing to make. Obviously the more critical the product, the more testing is required.
Yeah, but what is proper testing? Nowadays, really good testing needs to be an ongoing part of the development process. Everything the client sees, even the first demo, should have gone through an organized series of tests. Unfortunately, when a client, and even sometimes managers or any other non-techie, really, sees something doing something, they think those features are 'done'. Developers cannot let themselves be caught in that trap, so they need to test as they go.
The quality of software has been continually declining for the last decade, I think.
.com influx of bozos and you have alot of people spewing out crap code.
Software Engineering is making leaps and bounds, so there are many tools available for writing good software. The people who really know what they are doing have more at their disposal. However, more than ever, there are a very large number of incompetent developers out there. It's much easier to get into programming now than it was in the machine language/assembly/C days because things are much easier to use, and the tools are much more accessible. Combine that with the
Why does it seem like unit testing is only taught in Java programming courses? I have never seen this in any C/C++, C# or Visual Basic courses.
Blame it on JUnit. Since it provides a way to make unit testing easier, it's easier to get people to actually do it. When I was in school, we talked about unit testing, but never really did it very well. By employing the latest buzzwords such as JUnit and Spring in your design, it's much less work to build your unit tests that it would be with other languages.
I also think, for better or worse, the the Java community is much more open to the latest toys than users of the other established languages are, which may explain why the XUnit variants in other languages haven't taken off as well.
Wow, it's nice to see that you've done a good job of surpressing yourself.
Who needs to bother creating a Big Brother when the cowards take care of themselves?
Before anyone sets up any kind of web site, I strongly advise you to purchase an Umbrella Liabliity Insurance Policy. Among other things, these policies protect you from accusations of libel and slander.
While truth is an absolute defense against libel or slander, you don't want it to cost you your life savings to defend against a frivolous lawsuit because you spoke the truth someone didn't want to hear. For the cost of the umbrella policy - typically around $300 per year you can virtually stop any potential frivolous lawsuit. Such lawsuits are designed to intimidate the little guy and you're much less of a little guy when a multi-billion dollar insurance company is the one that is paying to defend you against the suit.
hmmm.... lets fix this one
Before anyone sets up any kind of web site, I strongly advise you to research an Umbrella Liabliity Insurance Policy. Among other things, these policies may protect you from accusations of libel and slander.
While proof is a defense against libel or slander, you don't want it to cost you your life savings to defend against a frivolous lawsuit because you spoke the truth someone didn't want to hear. For the cost of the umbrella policy - typically around $300 per year you can possibly prevent any potential frivolous lawsuit. Such lawsuits are designed to intimidate the little guy and you're much less of a little guy when you have adequate protection.
ahh much better. Only thing worse than financial disaster is financial disaster after you realize your poorly researched insurance policies really don't help you in your case
Be sure of what you are buying.
2) Sony Corp
Hmm... since we've already had today's Sony DRM article... lemme check my Slashdot manual...
flip, flip, flip... ahhh here it is...
Yes, since we've alreay had today's Sony DRM article, the newer Sony "Defender of Freedom" article means that we must express undying love for Sony until the posting of tomorrow's Sony DRM article.
Now if we can just keep AJAX and ditch Javascript.
We can only dream. A standard, browser supported REAL language. The client side should have been Java's world instead of just dopey applets
Too bad you're getting modded into the ground because people misunderstand your post.
You should try World of Warcraft. You can play at a leisurely pace and not have to worry about getting sucked in.
Definitely the game for RPG fans with busy lives.
It's very simple. CFO stands for "Chief of Fucking Off." Their job is to get hired, sit around for a few days, and then fuck off and look somewhere else for a job.
Sounds like most of the programmers I've worked with over the years. Similar to the sysadmins too, however they download porn instead of looking for jobs.
If Microsoft has the ear of the lawmakers, then they'll be in the best position to exploit the law.
Hey, this paranoia stuff is kinda fun!!
Ajax, or 'Asynchronous JavaScript and XML,' is allowing webpages to update as quickly as desktop software
Wow, and with the XML you can make it automatically talk to any system!!!!
e-Business has reached a new plateau! Synergy abounds! Am I e-dreaming or what! Woohoo!!
I spent 3 seconds on the arstechnica article posted and see that Microsoft has two options
1) Ship a boatload at once, then have a period where none are available
2) Stream out the shipments so that a constant, but limited supply are available
They saw from the PS2 launch, that the public reaction to option 1 wasn't very good.
So....they choose option 2.
It's a business choice made when weighing manufacturing constraints vs customer reactions.
Of course Slashdot wants to hype this up as yet another reason why Microsoft is evil, and people are biting.
Tell me, which organization here is the one playing psych games with their customers?
Want to save thousands of dollars on MSDN? [macrocosmictech.com]
Why are you charging $17 for this link?
From your post it is obvious that you are at best vaguely familar with the topics you speak of.
Well, to be honest, I really have no clue about the sort of systems that the ESA builds, so I was really stretching there. However, I'm not backing down on the argument that you cannot do a mathematical proof which guarantees that a complex piece of software is bug free. You can define a set of conditions and prove that the code works against those conditions, but you can never slap on the 100% bug free label.
No - I have a colleague, that used to work for ESA. Proving that software really works as it's supposed to do, is something you do, when you cannot afford the consequence of failure (eg. loss of human life, or perhaps even worse: bad PR...).
Now, my question for you folks: Could Java afford a failure in this area, or should SUN do what it takes?
I think you're really just trying to play the evil and incompetent big bisuness FUD card. How do you know Sun isn't doing this already? Also, you're still making the highly flawed assumption that proving that code works guarentees that it is bug free, and makes community testing irrelevent.
In the applications you're talking about, the environment is highly controlled. Often the hardware and software are specially designed for the system. The software is usually embedded, and has very limited responsibilities and highly controlled inputs. In those cases, you can create a pretty good model of the system, and do pretty good proofs about the code. Its very expensive, but people can be confident about the process. Still not perfect, because again, the sceintists need to create model of the real world, and models are a finite description of an infinite thing.
Now, going to Sun and Java, they have a highly uncontrolled environment. Their software needs to work securely on spyware infested Windows machines. They can't possible prove everything because they don't know all the influences on their software. Also, the proof process becomes much more complex multithreaded systems. Other threads or processes may change your invariants, which hoses your proof. Again, you can and should for important apps, still throw math at it, however, nothing elimates the usefulness of community testing.
Yes they can, it's the mathematical proof of a software. It's tough, time consuming, very expensive and requires *the horror* the actual usage of mathematicians, but it is possible to prove a software.
No you can't. You can get really close though.
Mathematics is not a description of how things work, it is only a model of how things work. When you toss it at your code, you still need to make assumptions about the environment which you are proving in. Again, to do these proofs, you need to make a model of the application working in the real world. You can pound out proofs all day about your code, but they will be crap if your underlying assumptions are wrong.
A really really good mathematician can make really really good assumptions and do a really really good verification of the software, but that is in no way a guarentee that the software is bug free.
Why not do what it takes: Prove that it will work, and prove that it cannot be broken!
;)
Did you just walk out of an undergrad Computer Science class?
Popping in pre/postconditions and doing line-by-line proofs doesn't cut it for an application of this complexity. While that is an important part of a real process, it doesn't guarentee coverage. You still have to make assumptions about the environment, which is the gotcha. Testing and QA is all about the assumptions you make and the boundaries you set. With a complex application the number of factors grows so large, that you cannot have the resources to cover every possible test. You can grab the most common stuff, but really need to dump it to the community to get the real 'out of the box' thinking hitting it.
Maybe they've got it this time?
I'd just be happy if they got one step closer, and this work can be built upon. No one will ever 'get it', only because human language right now is too ambiguous. They'll get close enough to be useful though.
However, my vision of the future is where human language and thinking actually adapts to the computers and becomes more formalized. The languages will be tightened up by standards committees and taught in schools as the official languages. After a few generations there will be a much greater harmony between computers and people.
couldn't he have just paid off the right people in the Mexican government to get them to look the other way??
Maybe he did? If they turn him in, they get the money AND brownie points with the US.
This is one of those threads where people get free Karma by pontificating about the impending demise of Microsoft.