I see a problem with white-listing. Objects are often part of a bigger ecosystem. You may have to white-list sub-sets of objects to do it right, making it non-trivial to guarantee you didn't leave a current or future hole.
You are right that it might be a big saving to have auto-object generation, but at a risk.
[per link] He says the "desire to dominate socially is not correlated with intelligence"; it's correlated with testosterone, "which AI systems won't have."
Isn't that a sexist statement? It implies women are less likely to want to dominate and rule. It fits in with that "Google Memo" that got that dude fired.
Not necessarily. It's a matter of economics. Sometimes it's cheaper to waste energy than spend resources on efficiency. If fuel is relatively cheap, then efficiency may not be worth the added cost.
A little girl goes to a pet shop and asks, "Excuthe me do you have any widdle wabbits?" The shop keeper's heart melts.
He gets down on his knees so that he is on her level and says, "Do you want a widdle white wabbit or a thoft, fwuffy, bwack wabbit, or one like that widdle bwown one over there...?"
The little girl blushes, rocks on her heels, puts her hands on her knees, leans forward and whispers . . . "I dont weally fink my pyfon gives a fwuck."
Assume everything is compromised. Assume nothing is secure. Design around that assumption and you will survive.
But you won't be able to compete with shortcut takers. They will look more productive than you. The penalty for shortcut taking is not just large enough, I hate to say. I'm just the messenger.
It's probably a problem with "generic" reconstruction of objects based on data. If the data is used to (re) construct objects, then some objects can potentially have behavior because that's how objects are defined. If the data is "clever" enough, it may end up constructing objects you don't want.
It's probably better to parse out to low-level "scalar" values and hand-code the part that stuffs them into objects or databases rather than let a parser actually build objects or object trees itself.
Adobe also gives versions weird names, and it drove everyone nuts trying to figure out what was what. It's as if they hired a sports-shoe ad agency to name shit. Does that really attract young drooling buyers?
You can pay young people way less and work them to death because they don't know any better.
Indeed! Our young architect shoved every possible layer and service he could into our MVC stack. He's either a feature pack-rat, and/or trying to pad his resume with every buzzword he can.
Most the devs are young and don't know the difference and probably want to pad their resumes also with the gizmos. Thus, development is turned into a typing contest, and young fingers will probably win that one.
My only hope is to convince the suits it's bloat and bullshit, but the architect has so far been out brown-nosing me. I probably lost this round. The suits may realize its bloat a few years down the road, but that may be too late.
I suspect the architect is intentionally trying to get rid of the old people because we know enough to question his judgement. He's using buzzwords to paint us as outdated and using a bloated stack to make it a typing contest between young fingers and old fingers. Clever bastard. He'll probably trim the stack once we are gone.
Something as simple as your car being dirty and then cleaning it would fool such
If it's combined with plate reading and the same car keeps changing profile, you'd get put on the Suspicion List and watched more. I suppose you could trick it a couple of times, but keeping that up risks triggering the fiddling flag. (Now why does that sound perverted?)
Disney's probable defense: "We DIDN'T KNOW that the data-mining contractors we hired to build our apps would actually data-mine our customers."
It's indeed reckless and suspicious, but unless one can prove Disney actually knew, they may get off the hook.
I once worked for a big company who rented H1B visa workers from a fly-by-night contractor who mistreated the visa workers. If visa abuse were found, the big company could deny any wrong-doing by saying the contractor's staff was the contractor's responsibility, not theirs. The big co simply rented labor by the hour.
New coding/platform paradigm increases reuse, magic abstraction that reads your mind, separation of concerns without concern-interface bloat, magic defaults, closer to customer's needs, maintainable RAD, blah blah blah...
(I've actually built frameworks that have a lot of those, but the huge caveat is that you have to settle on a fixed set of conventions that fit a particular shop and avoid the temptation or peer pressure to stuff it with snazzy UI toys.)
Slashdot Mirror
Leaving idiots doesn't scale.
Correction: "just not large enough...".
Lexdysia
I see a problem with white-listing. Objects are often part of a bigger ecosystem. You may have to white-list sub-sets of objects to do it right, making it non-trivial to guarantee you didn't leave a current or future hole.
You are right that it might be a big saving to have auto-object generation, but at a risk.
Isn't that a sexist statement? It implies women are less likely to want to dominate and rule. It fits in with that "Google Memo" that got that dude fired.
Or terrorists. "For some reason" leaves the door wide open.
That's gonna drive HR crazy.
Not necessarily. It's a matter of economics. Sometimes it's cheaper to waste energy than spend resources on efficiency. If fuel is relatively cheap, then efficiency may not be worth the added cost.
"Pyfuck". Reminds me of a joke:
A little girl goes to a pet shop and asks, "Excuthe me do you have any widdle wabbits?" The shop keeper's heart melts.
He gets down on his knees so that he is on her level and says, "Do you want a widdle white wabbit or a thoft, fwuffy, bwack wabbit, or one like that widdle bwown one over there...?"
The little girl blushes, rocks on her heels, puts her hands on her knees, leans forward and whispers . . . "I dont weally fink my pyfon gives a fwuck."
More like, "Oh shit! Now only Microsoft will hire me."
Q: What's the difference between RMS and God?
A: God doesn't think he's RMS.
(Re-purposed Ellison joke)
But you won't be able to compete with shortcut takers. They will look more productive than you. The penalty for shortcut taking is not just large enough, I hate to say. I'm just the messenger.
It's probably a problem with "generic" reconstruction of objects based on data. If the data is used to (re) construct objects, then some objects can potentially have behavior because that's how objects are defined. If the data is "clever" enough, it may end up constructing objects you don't want.
It's probably better to parse out to low-level "scalar" values and hand-code the part that stuffs them into objects or databases rather than let a parser actually build objects or object trees itself.
But PHB's want their shiny dancy UI/UX toys or they won't pay you.
Run Linux on Amigas, then you'd really have annoying fanboyz.
Adobe also gives versions weird names, and it drove everyone nuts trying to figure out what was what. It's as if they hired a sports-shoe ad agency to name shit. Does that really attract young drooling buyers?
More marketing gimmicks, exactly what Oracle needs to turn its slimy reputation around. Brilliant!
Indeed! Our young architect shoved every possible layer and service he could into our MVC stack. He's either a feature pack-rat, and/or trying to pad his resume with every buzzword he can.
Most the devs are young and don't know the difference and probably want to pad their resumes also with the gizmos. Thus, development is turned into a typing contest, and young fingers will probably win that one.
My only hope is to convince the suits it's bloat and bullshit, but the architect has so far been out brown-nosing me. I probably lost this round. The suits may realize its bloat a few years down the road, but that may be too late.
I suspect the architect is intentionally trying to get rid of the old people because we know enough to question his judgement. He's using buzzwords to paint us as outdated and using a bloated stack to make it a typing contest between young fingers and old fingers. Clever bastard. He'll probably trim the stack once we are gone.
If it's combined with plate reading and the same car keeps changing profile, you'd get put on the Suspicion List and watched more. I suppose you could trick it a couple of times, but keeping that up risks triggering the fiddling flag. (Now why does that sound perverted?)
It's a trainer for a Galaxy Note 7.
They are simply thinking different.
Make America grate their teeth
I'd pit the accuracy/coverage of CNN over Fox "News" any friggen day.
Disney's probable defense: "We DIDN'T KNOW that the data-mining contractors we hired to build our apps would actually data-mine our customers."
It's indeed reckless and suspicious, but unless one can prove Disney actually knew, they may get off the hook.
I once worked for a big company who rented H1B visa workers from a fly-by-night contractor who mistreated the visa workers. If visa abuse were found, the big company could deny any wrong-doing by saying the contractor's staff was the contractor's responsibility, not theirs. The big co simply rented labor by the hour.
I for one would take reliability over speed. Reliability is a big problem with our current 1.4 choices of providers.
Being around a good while I see the following news patterns:
Promising Alzheimer lab breakthrough may end the disease...
Promising flying car tech close to delivering flying cars for all...
Promising fusion power lab breakthrough close to delivering cheap safe green power...
Coffee proven good/bad/good/bad/ [alternates...]
Small amounts of wine proven good/bad/good/bad/ [alternates...]
Mild gaming proven good/bad/good/bad/ [alternates...]
New coding/platform paradigm increases reuse, magic abstraction that reads your mind, separation of concerns without concern-interface bloat, magic defaults, closer to customer's needs, maintainable RAD, blah blah blah...
(I've actually built frameworks that have a lot of those, but the huge caveat is that you have to settle on a fixed set of conventions that fit a particular shop and avoid the temptation or peer pressure to stuff it with snazzy UI toys.)