But the flip side is that English is easier to read and write than Chinese (even with its goofy spelling). Those Chinese characters are a royal PITA to learn.
Perhaps a fonetic* version of English will replace the current English spelling mess. Then again, one could do similar with written Chinese, such as Pin-Yin.
Grokking and managing parallel programming seems to be the bottleneck. Using mass parallelism can be done, but so far it's been so difficult that it has yet to be worth it for the vast majority of apps (or at least the vast majority of the operations in a given app, for graphics and database calls can sometimes use lots of parallelism).
It's too early to know if it's just too hard a problem for the human mind in general, or the current generation of programmers is too locked into a way of thinking.
Regarding the suggestion to follow nature, nature can be unpredictable. Do we want that characteristic in our applications? How do you debug something if you can't faithfully recreate the state? I can see an organic mess being fun for some games, but not for accounting and tracking software.
We need more pilot projects to experiment with techniques.
Rather than all-or-nothing, how about making or keeping a list of "suspect" clients. Let's call this the "grey list". When there is a flood of activity, resources are given first to clients not on the grey list. Grey list clients either have to wait longer, or are rejected with a "Server Overburdened" message, depending on the load.
This way ISP's don't risk rejecting legit clients under normal circumstances.
Hackers tend to focus on the most common tools because a discovered flaw can be used on more instances. If Python or Your Favorite Language were more common, it would probably be a bigger relative target. There is some truth to Security Through Obscurity.
Why aren't there "long-term support versions" similar to what Ubuntu offers? Only security flaws are patched in such versions. However, I realize patching security flaws can break existing software also, but if you only patch security flaws rather than add and change features for the line, the magnitude of problems from updates would be smaller.
can you do something? And in what kind of time/space constraints?
But the practical bottleneck is usually human (coder) grokking, not direct physics. And the human mind is poorly understood. It's a field thus closer to psychology than chemistry. Some want "Computer Science" to shy away from mind-centric issues; which would keep it "pure", but probably less useful as a tradeoff.
Outsourcing factory work was NOT good for the average factory worker, although it was a net benefit for everybody else. The whole thing is pitting one profession against another.
In theory some say such eventually floats all boats, but in practice the benefits of "open" trade appears to have flowed to a select few, as the inequality metrics show. They rest may have cheaper trinkets, but there is more to life than cheap trinkets.
I suggest we try balanced trade instead of "free" trade and see how it works out. Countries that don't import enough of our services or products to balance their exports are tariffed. That encourages them to open their own markets to our country.
If we extend that logic to all professions, then in theory we should let just about everybody in. There's a guy in Timbuktu who will fix my plumbing top notch for $2/hr, which is good money back home. Maybe his brother can replace Paul for $3.
Slashdot Mirror
But the flip side is that English is easier to read and write than Chinese (even with its goofy spelling). Those Chinese characters are a royal PITA to learn.
Perhaps a fonetic* version of English will replace the current English spelling mess. Then again, one could do similar with written Chinese, such as Pin-Yin.
* Intentional
Cylon or Borg
Why can't they make special monitors or add-on screens with "ribbed" lenses that correct for fogey-vision?
Maybe that's why the banks F'd up mortgage pricing?
The Gates quote is ambiguous. One can read it different ways.
Grokking and managing parallel programming seems to be the bottleneck. Using mass parallelism can be done, but so far it's been so difficult that it has yet to be worth it for the vast majority of apps (or at least the vast majority of the operations in a given app, for graphics and database calls can sometimes use lots of parallelism).
It's too early to know if it's just too hard a problem for the human mind in general, or the current generation of programmers is too locked into a way of thinking.
Regarding the suggestion to follow nature, nature can be unpredictable. Do we want that characteristic in our applications? How do you debug something if you can't faithfully recreate the state? I can see an organic mess being fun for some games, but not for accounting and tracking software.
We need more pilot projects to experiment with techniques.
Example of a brain that can't handle parallel thought processing.
"4 cores should be enough for any workstation"
Perhaps it's an over-simplification, but if it turns out wrong, people will be quoting that for many decades like they do Gates' memory quote.
Ban chance!
NK should get even by re-editing the movie to make it actually entertaining, and sending it back.
Rather than all-or-nothing, how about making or keeping a list of "suspect" clients. Let's call this the "grey list". When there is a flood of activity, resources are given first to clients not on the grey list. Grey list clients either have to wait longer, or are rejected with a "Server Overburdened" message, depending on the load.
This way ISP's don't risk rejecting legit clients under normal circumstances.
So, we are in Nerdonia here?
The 'net has it all:
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg....
Hackers tend to focus on the most common tools because a discovered flaw can be used on more instances. If Python or Your Favorite Language were more common, it would probably be a bigger relative target. There is some truth to Security Through Obscurity.
Thus, write your CMS in Brainfuck :-)
Why aren't there "long-term support versions" similar to what Ubuntu offers? Only security flaws are patched in such versions. However, I realize patching security flaws can break existing software also, but if you only patch security flaws rather than add and change features for the line, the magnitude of problems from updates would be smaller.
The outcome either way is speculation. We should try it in my opinion. If it doesn't work out, we stop.
Only Moses can part the PayWall
If the gov't has the power to insert birth announcements into Hawaiian newspapers decades old, then it can send new research to old NASA.
But the practical bottleneck is usually human (coder) grokking, not direct physics. And the human mind is poorly understood. It's a field thus closer to psychology than chemistry. Some want "Computer Science" to shy away from mind-centric issues; which would keep it "pure", but probably less useful as a tradeoff.
Just think of it, Slashdot could get the best dupe-checkers the world has to offer!
Outsourcing factory work was NOT good for the average factory worker, although it was a net benefit for everybody else. The whole thing is pitting one profession against another.
In theory some say such eventually floats all boats, but in practice the benefits of "open" trade appears to have flowed to a select few, as the inequality metrics show. They rest may have cheaper trinkets, but there is more to life than cheap trinkets.
I suggest we try balanced trade instead of "free" trade and see how it works out. Countries that don't import enough of our services or products to balance their exports are tariffed. That encourages them to open their own markets to our country.
Then where will our managers come from?
If we extend that logic to all professions, then in theory we should let just about everybody in. There's a guy in Timbuktu who will fix my plumbing top notch for $2/hr, which is good money back home. Maybe his brother can replace Paul for $3.
Simple: Hemisphere Envy
N. Korea could really tick Sony off by re-editing it and making it good.