The Greeks were amazing thinkers. They also used complex wrapping of rope around poles, pulleys, and pegs to program automated plays--mechanical TV's essentially.
Too bad they never leveraged it, probably due to the abundance of slaves.
William Wilberforce, a UK abolitionist, may have sparked the industrial revolution more than the steam engine and technology.
A steam engine was invented by the ancient Greeks. However, because slaves were so common then (usually captured enemies), they didn't think much about labor saving devices. Their gizmos were mostly considered show pieces, and thus there was little incentive to improve on their efficiency or utility.
William Wilberforce's pressure on UK politics reduced slave usage, making machines a more attractive alternative, thus propelling advances in manufacturing machinery.
True, but the "Darwinism" of the market place will filter out the biggest dummies. I'm generally talking about a trend, not a revolution. Companies and managers that find a way to leverage fungible staff by having relatively clean work processes will expand and/or survive recessions better than those run by pure PHB's.
Those who make the decisions often focus on superficial things. I don't know a fix for that.
I've seen people take sloppy shortcuts to put something visually snazzy up quick, and the clueless people who evaluate it think they are a Web-God.
If one points out potential security, ADA, performance, maintenance, device-dependent problems, they are painted as jealous nay-sayers. It's happened to me many times.
And those making the decisions expect to get promoted or hired away fairly soon; the long-term is not their concern.
Chimps are drawn to shiny objects, not smart objects. That's just the way it is. It's not a technology problem, it's a people problem.
Who knows, maybe I'm making similar mistakes with things I know little about like plumbing, car repairs, bank accounts, etc. Maybe civilization is just growing too complex to manage well. We cannot all be subject experts in everything because the subjects keep growing.
You are constantly explaining and re-explaining how your business works, and bugs are repeatedly entering codebases because the developer hasn't spent years understanding the business and its workflows.
Based on experience I generally agree. Domain knowledge is very useful and seems undervalued by the industry.
However, perhaps the changing economy will weed out companies with convoluted work processes, favoring those that keep their business rules, data, and work-flows clean and logical.
It could push co's toward pre-packaged infrastructure systems such as ERP suites and off-the-shelf HR software. That way one can hire an expert on the given infrastructure product and they won't walk in clueless to your operations.
Things are not changing for just workers. If you want the advantages of standardized plugs, you have to also have standardized ports.
I used to "gig around" a lot, and found it difficult to co-raise a family under. If you are single and can hop all over the country and/or globe, that's great! But it's hard on families.
During good times you may be able to stay mostly local, but good times rarely last. The boom/bust "business cycle" of capitalism has been going on long before the USA existed, and has yet to be solved.
If gigs paid very well, then perhaps one could live with more gaps by saving up. But I have not seen a significant lasting pay advantage, especially during recessions.
Maybe a few "elite" workers with speedy eyes and eidetic memories can pull it off and come out ahead of traditional salaries, but by definition, most of us are not elite.
I would argue that such a Grim Reaper (molecule or construct) would have reached Earth at some point already...
I would also, but that's not a 100% certainty. Should we still gamble if it's a say 99.99% certainty?
Maybe the deadly stuff doesn't travel in space debris well. Mammals* don't, for example. Just because SOME microbes can survive in blasted rocks doesn't mean all do.
it is MUCH more likely that we find something inimical to human life here on Earth- for instance, very deep in an ocean
Not sure about that, but that's still not a reason to tempt fate. The fact that Fred is more likely to bop you than John is NOT a reason to agitate John.
Earth life has been exposed to Earth life and the attacks and immunities evolved together. Mars could offer us an ugly mismatch. Cross-continent "invasive species" have shown surprising destruction to native life. Mars could give us a magnified version of this poorly understood phenomenon.
Our species will ultimately go extinct without space travel- this is a fact!
True, but we don't have to rush things. In the future when we are ready for inter-stellar travel, we'll probably know more about biology and cures.
* Humans may be just such a "grim reaper" creature from Mars life's perspective.
I'd like to see a standard way to store and import/export settings for applications such that each one doesn't reinvent the feature management wheel. That way one can use a single tool to search, study, import, export and change them. Here's a rough draft of a settings attribute layout:
app-ID// or app name feature-ID title group-ID// group feature belongs to value-type// string, number, integer, date/time, uri, other custom-value factory-value// default install value value-changed-on feature-notes user-notes// user can save reason for change key-words// synonyms to aid feature search engines scope// global (computer), user, document, etc. sequence// used if there is a usage ranking
I realize there are various intricacies to work out, such as prerequisite settings, but this can serve as a starting point.
How do we guarantee we don't contaminate Mars and vice versa? The risk of bringing back a deadly disease is not zero. Suppose Mars has prions or something we have no immunity for?
I agree it's a small chance, but also a potential civilization-killing chance.
As much as it's proven orgs are overall lax on security, security concerns do complicate IT greatly. It used to be a lot easier to "hook things up": different servers and boxes all talking to each other doing a different part of the job.
Now it requires diddling with black boxes because nothing exposes helpful info about what it is in the name of security.
Perhaps if "they" designed systems right, things would be easier, but humans are imperfect and build imperfect things. An appeal to idealism falls flat.
These extra layers and precautions are "job security" such that perhaps I shouldn't complain, but I miss the days where it was easy to connect different things in an almost Lego and Tinkertoy way to get results fast. Now the Tinkertoys always ask, "Hark, who goes there?" I don't like red tape.
Candidates and presidents promise grandiose things like Mars-nauts or moon-bases, but don't bother to fund them. They want to give Kennedy-esque speeches but don't want to pay Kennedy's bill.
I used to do similar stuff for marketing research: How many customers fitting a certain profile purchased product X and also product Y, with and without promotion Z.
The hard part was that the tables and product codes were messy. Historical baggage plagued the design. It would have been a relatively simple job with "clean" databases. (A lot of orgs have messy databases, by the way.)
I pushed the idea of views or re-constituted table copies for marketing queries, but the DBA was too booked on other projects and they didn't want me to roll my own. I'd put myself out of job anyhow if someone succeeded at simplifying things, for 2/3 of queries could be put into web forms so the marketers could run their own. (I eventually left anyhow.)
Seems to me this could help the sport more than hurt it. If the guidance is more visible, it makes it more interesting to spectators. Something that swerves is more fun to watch than something that mostly stays in a straight line.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It has years of domain-related adjustments and logic wired into it that you won't discover, the hard way, until you try to redo it.
Instead, look for ways to tune the existing UI and features. Better labeling, better color hinting, better documentation, etc.
I've rarely seen "overhaul" efforts produce significantly better results. If you get lucky, you may get "somewhat" better results, but it will probably not feel worth it in the end.
Can physics professors enjoy Road Runner cartoons, or do the blatant violations of physics drive them nuts?
I know one who attempted to codify the cartoons rules, such as "a being doesn't actually fall until they realize they are (inadvertently) suspended in the air." She said, "If you are going to make a fake world, at least be consistent in it."
Maybe one expects cartoons to be goofy, whereas action and drama movies attempt to look real, and that's what sets subject experts off.
I know some real crime analysts, and CSI drives them crazy.
That is a lot of code, is that a realistic number for a router?
It's divided into:
A. 1 million lines that do real work. B. 10 million lines to verify nobody tampered with "A". C. 18 million lines to verify nobody tampered with "B". D. 1 million lines to display a disclaimer that says if somebody tampers with "C", you are S.O.L.
There may be some truth to that, but "punishing" the party by not showing up at the polls just gives GOP more power to be even Bushier. If you kill your only half-ally, you are left with just enemies.
Either way, voters on both sides are reactionary and shallow.
(As far as "constitutionality", that word is thrown around too much. The Constitution is vague on a good many issues.)
Slashdot Mirror
The Greeks were amazing thinkers. They also used complex wrapping of rope around poles, pulleys, and pegs to program automated plays--mechanical TV's essentially.
Too bad they never leveraged it, probably due to the abundance of slaves.
William Wilberforce, a UK abolitionist, may have sparked the industrial revolution more than the steam engine and technology.
A steam engine was invented by the ancient Greeks. However, because slaves were so common then (usually captured enemies), they didn't think much about labor saving devices. Their gizmos were mostly considered show pieces, and thus there was little incentive to improve on their efficiency or utility.
William Wilberforce's pressure on UK politics reduced slave usage, making machines a more attractive alternative, thus propelling advances in manufacturing machinery.
True, but the "Darwinism" of the market place will filter out the biggest dummies. I'm generally talking about a trend, not a revolution. Companies and managers that find a way to leverage fungible staff by having relatively clean work processes will expand and/or survive recessions better than those run by pure PHB's.
We have something similar at work, it's called McAf~` &j # ' NO CARRIER
Those who make the decisions often focus on superficial things. I don't know a fix for that.
I've seen people take sloppy shortcuts to put something visually snazzy up quick, and the clueless people who evaluate it think they are a Web-God.
If one points out potential security, ADA, performance, maintenance, device-dependent problems, they are painted as jealous nay-sayers. It's happened to me many times.
And those making the decisions expect to get promoted or hired away fairly soon; the long-term is not their concern.
Chimps are drawn to shiny objects, not smart objects. That's just the way it is. It's not a technology problem, it's a people problem.
Who knows, maybe I'm making similar mistakes with things I know little about like plumbing, car repairs, bank accounts, etc. Maybe civilization is just growing too complex to manage well. We cannot all be subject experts in everything because the subjects keep growing.
Based on experience I generally agree. Domain knowledge is very useful and seems undervalued by the industry.
However, perhaps the changing economy will weed out companies with convoluted work processes, favoring those that keep their business rules, data, and work-flows clean and logical.
It could push co's toward pre-packaged infrastructure systems such as ERP suites and off-the-shelf HR software. That way one can hire an expert on the given infrastructure product and they won't walk in clueless to your operations.
Things are not changing for just workers. If you want the advantages of standardized plugs, you have to also have standardized ports.
I used to "gig around" a lot, and found it difficult to co-raise a family under. If you are single and can hop all over the country and/or globe, that's great! But it's hard on families.
During good times you may be able to stay mostly local, but good times rarely last. The boom/bust "business cycle" of capitalism has been going on long before the USA existed, and has yet to be solved.
If gigs paid very well, then perhaps one could live with more gaps by saving up. But I have not seen a significant lasting pay advantage, especially during recessions.
Maybe a few "elite" workers with speedy eyes and eidetic memories can pull it off and come out ahead of traditional salaries, but by definition, most of us are not elite.
I would also, but that's not a 100% certainty. Should we still gamble if it's a say 99.99% certainty?
Maybe the deadly stuff doesn't travel in space debris well. Mammals* don't, for example. Just because SOME microbes can survive in blasted rocks doesn't mean all do.
Not sure about that, but that's still not a reason to tempt fate. The fact that Fred is more likely to bop you than John is NOT a reason to agitate John.
Earth life has been exposed to Earth life and the attacks and immunities evolved together. Mars could offer us an ugly mismatch. Cross-continent "invasive species" have shown surprising destruction to native life. Mars could give us a magnified version of this poorly understood phenomenon.
True, but we don't have to rush things. In the future when we are ready for inter-stellar travel, we'll probably know more about biology and cures.
* Humans may be just such a "grim reaper" creature from Mars life's perspective.
Maybe that's how it was built, but your machine got infected.
I'd like to see a standard way to store and import/export settings for applications such that each one doesn't reinvent the feature management wheel. That way one can use a single tool to search, study, import, export and change them. Here's a rough draft of a settings attribute layout:
app-ID // or app name // group feature belongs to // string, number, integer, date/time, uri, other // default install value // user can save reason for change // synonyms to aid feature search engines // global (computer), user, document, etc. // used if there is a usage ranking
feature-ID
title
group-ID
value-type
custom-value
factory-value
value-changed-on
feature-notes
user-notes
key-words
scope
sequence
I realize there are various intricacies to work out, such as prerequisite settings, but this can serve as a starting point.
for the 1%.
Those are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They could spend 1/3 of their time going, "duuhh, why is my ass posted on Facebook?"
225 Literalmeters
How do we guarantee we don't contaminate Mars and vice versa? The risk of bringing back a deadly disease is not zero. Suppose Mars has prions or something we have no immunity for?
I agree it's a small chance, but also a potential civilization-killing chance.
Correction: "An ol'..."
As much as it's proven orgs are overall lax on security, security concerns do complicate IT greatly. It used to be a lot easier to "hook things up": different servers and boxes all talking to each other doing a different part of the job.
Now it requires diddling with black boxes because nothing exposes helpful info about what it is in the name of security.
Perhaps if "they" designed systems right, things would be easier, but humans are imperfect and build imperfect things. An appeal to idealism falls flat.
These extra layers and precautions are "job security" such that perhaps I shouldn't complain, but I miss the days where it was easy to connect different things in an almost Lego and Tinkertoy way to get results fast. Now the Tinkertoys always ask, "Hark, who goes there?" I don't like red tape.
Kids even need a password to get OFF my lawn.
Candidates and presidents promise grandiose things like Mars-nauts or moon-bases, but don't bother to fund them. They want to give Kennedy-esque speeches but don't want to pay Kennedy's bill.
I used to do similar stuff for marketing research: How many customers fitting a certain profile purchased product X and also product Y, with and without promotion Z.
The hard part was that the tables and product codes were messy. Historical baggage plagued the design. It would have been a relatively simple job with "clean" databases. (A lot of orgs have messy databases, by the way.)
I pushed the idea of views or re-constituted table copies for marketing queries, but the DBA was too booked on other projects and they didn't want me to roll my own. I'd put myself out of job anyhow if someone succeeded at simplifying things, for 2/3 of queries could be put into web forms so the marketers could run their own. (I eventually left anyhow.)
Seems to me this could help the sport more than hurt it. If the guidance is more visible, it makes it more interesting to spectators. Something that swerves is more fun to watch than something that mostly stays in a straight line.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. It has years of domain-related adjustments and logic wired into it that you won't discover, the hard way, until you try to redo it.
Instead, look for ways to tune the existing UI and features. Better labeling, better color hinting, better documentation, etc.
I've rarely seen "overhaul" efforts produce significantly better results. If you get lucky, you may get "somewhat" better results, but it will probably not feel worth it in the end.
Who do you think staffs Dell's helpdesk now. Many of the members have regular jobs.
I wonder if they can help me get the snoopware out of Windows 10. Sounds right up their alley.
Can physics professors enjoy Road Runner cartoons, or do the blatant violations of physics drive them nuts?
I know one who attempted to codify the cartoons rules, such as "a being doesn't actually fall until they realize they are (inadvertently) suspended in the air." She said, "If you are going to make a fake world, at least be consistent in it."
Maybe one expects cartoons to be goofy, whereas action and drama movies attempt to look real, and that's what sets subject experts off.
I know some real crime analysts, and CSI drives them crazy.
At least their code is short:
10 DELETE GOVERNMENT
20 GOTO 10
It's divided into:
A. 1 million lines that do real work.
B. 10 million lines to verify nobody tampered with "A".
C. 18 million lines to verify nobody tampered with "B".
D. 1 million lines to display a disclaimer that says if somebody tampers with "C", you are S.O.L.
There may be some truth to that, but "punishing" the party by not showing up at the polls just gives GOP more power to be even Bushier. If you kill your only half-ally, you are left with just enemies.
Either way, voters on both sides are reactionary and shallow.
(As far as "constitutionality", that word is thrown around too much. The Constitution is vague on a good many issues.)