Quite the contrary. In a conventionally powered car, the fuel tank is located in the rear of the car. In the case of incidents like the Tesla fires, the fuel tank is protected by the entire length of the car , while the Tesla's battery is only minimally protected despite it's more exposed position to such hazards.
But also consider - you have more influence over what the front of your car hits, you have less influence over what hits you from behind (especially when stationary).
So it may not be correct to automatically conclude that having a fuel tank in the rear is the safer option.
I'm not claiming that it's not safer, but I personally trust myself not to collide with an object in front of me rather than some other fool slamming into my car from behind (or the from any direction in for that matter)....
I think my point is somewhat different than "a CD is a bunch of numbers" and I agree that is not particularly useful.
Numbers are in themselves not math or an algorithm and therefore I would not claim that the data on a CD is math - it's not, it's an analogue of an analogue signal (I think that's right?)
The bunch of numbers on a CD is not an algorithm - they are the input to the algorithm - the software that reads those numbers and makes it into sound is the math/algorithm. The numbers are useless without the math to make them 'alive' again.
I've also emailed your wife to let her know you think she's a pile of hydrogen and oxygen - not very flattering...
So what? Who cares if the difference between Mac and FreeBSD is due to art and design? That has NO baring of what the 'thing' is...
Oh, semantics... Yes the end user buys the product, but the product is also the software (the end result), it's the 'thing' we're discussing..
I don't think you have any interest in understanding my point, you are ignoring any points I make that are relevant to the discussion and instead bring in this philosophical 'Steve Jobs' blather...
This is going no where, you think software is 95% art - your definition of what a product is seems to be where the effort was spent. This makes no sense in the context of this discussion and is NOT what I am discussing.
I'll be clear - I am not referring to effort. I am referring to what the thing 'is'... You can't seem to grasp that.
I am not saying and will never say that programmers are performing mathematical analysis and implementation when writing code (obviously this is the case some times). I am saying that the PRODUCT is math, not the thought process that goes into it.
And I agree that UI design is art. But that doesn't change a thing - the end result is a bunch of algorithms and art. The effort is art, the product is mostly math/algorithms.
Just because the programmer did not explicitly 'do the math' does not mean it's not there or is not relevant. Remember the context in which this discussion started..
I was not trying to make a sensible analogy, my point is that the effort or the cost has NOTHING to do with how much is art and how much is math (or algorithms if you prefer).
It certainly has a direct baring on the cost, time and labour, but still NOTHING to do with the quantity of art vs math.
If you are trying to say 95% EFFORT (man hours of work)goes in to art, then perhaps that might make sense (but I still wouldn't agree), but that would have no relevance to the original topic.
Not quite - software is algorithms (math) regardless or how much artistic talent goes into its creation, it's still just algorithms (despite how well or poorly they are expressed in code).
My point was much more about the 95% & 5% assertion - what unit of measurement is used here - how did the OP come about these numbers? The are completely arbitrary and meaningless. It as useful as me saying "Music is 95% soul and 5% sound" - meaningless nonsense.
Sure games are part software (the algorithms - ie the game) and art (the stuff that makes the algorithms enjoyable and reach our senses) but to whack some arbitrary figure that games are 95% art is a massive distortion of reality.
Thanks for the nice leading insult - works really well.
But anyway, to steal a quote from elsewhere:
every algorithm is as mathematical as anything could be. An algorithm is an abstract concept unrelated to physical laws of the universe
Computer programs are JUST algorithms, nothing more... Gears and Levers have very physical characteristics and are not abstract. Music is a much closer analogy - though there are some not so subtle differences. Music is not an algorithm that takes input and produces output (like math or software), it is output only, it's akin to a story (which can also be represented mathematically as you suggest and that is meaningless in that context) but it is nothing like software (a set of algorithms).
Software is explicitly created as sets of algorithms, music while it can be 'expressed' as a mathematical algorithm (ie an algorithm can be found to describe or create it) it its self is not an algorithm in the same sense that software is.
The creation of the art for a game is insignificant compared to the generations of math contributing to the same game - the difference is the math is reused over and over again where as the art is typically a closer to a once use item (loosely). This can give the illusion that the game is all art, but that is only because most of the math (the algorithms that make the game work ) mostly existed before the game was ever considered - but it's still there, we can't ignore it just because the 'effort' in any specific game is small.
Sure there are lots of abstractions that hide a lot of math from the average developer - but these are just a simplification of the already existing algorithms (math) and doesn't make it irrelevant.
How can you fail to see that this describes the effort spent and has nothing to do with what the definition of the end product is or what percentage of the product is one thing or another...
Pro tip for thinking clearly and learning new things
Glad I'm talking to a pro...
As a pro, you should take the time to reflect on your own 'sensical' statements - and probably leave the high and mighty I'll tell you how dumb you are attitude in your pocket where you can reference it your self.
If you have a $150,000 house, you have about about $500 of light fixtures. Your house is less than 1% light fixtures.
No, my light fixtures COST less than 1% of the house. The COST has nothing to do with any measure of QUANTITY other than the cost.
To give another absurd example, if my house did in fact cost $150,000 and I then (stupidly) put in a $3m gold and diamond light fitting (that weights 1kg) then is my house comprised mostly of light fittings? No...
If my house cost $10 in bricks and mortar and $200,000 for light fittings. The house took 3 men 3 months to complete and the lights took 5 men 3 months to complete. My house is 99.99995% light fittings.
What's more, the math 'effort' was probably mostly implemented before the game was ever even thought of - but it is still there, even if it's effort free.
If the information had not yet been received by the pubic then the information was not yet public.
There were no guarantees that the message would reach its recipient until that event occurred.
Does the law/regulation take into account information travel time from the point of announcement in determining the order of events?
I don't know, but I'm pretty sure there has to be a possibility that the information has been received though. That's not really a nuance nor unrealistic.
If there is a real relationship and effect, I expect it is related to the proportion of new information that a baby/toddler/young child needs to process.
Slashdot Mirror
LM = timestamp of the last preferences change..
I know if someone owed me $3B, I'd be getting on top of that right away.
How could any entity allow any valid debit to escalate to such a large amount before calling it in?
Doesn't sound right to me...
Pffft, this will never take off..
Quite the contrary. In a conventionally powered car, the fuel tank is located in the rear of the car. In the case of incidents like the Tesla fires, the fuel tank is protected by the entire length of the car , while the Tesla's battery is only minimally protected despite it's more exposed position to such hazards.
But also consider - you have more influence over what the front of your car hits, you have less influence over what hits you from behind (especially when stationary).
So it may not be correct to automatically conclude that having a fuel tank in the rear is the safer option.
I'm not claiming that it's not safer, but I personally trust myself not to collide with an object in front of me rather than some other fool slamming into my car from behind (or the from any direction in for that matter)....
Likewise, I like all discussion :)
I think my point is somewhat different than "a CD is a bunch of numbers" and I agree that is not particularly useful.
Numbers are in themselves not math or an algorithm and therefore I would not claim that the data on a CD is math - it's not, it's an analogue of an analogue signal (I think that's right?)
The bunch of numbers on a CD is not an algorithm - they are the input to the algorithm - the software that reads those numbers and makes it into sound is the math/algorithm. The numbers are useless without the math to make them 'alive' again.
I've also emailed your wife to let her know you think she's a pile of hydrogen and oxygen - not very flattering...
So what? Who cares if the difference between Mac and FreeBSD is due to art and design? That has NO baring of what the 'thing' is...
Oh, semantics... Yes the end user buys the product, but the product is also the software (the end result), it's the 'thing' we're discussing..
I don't think you have any interest in understanding my point, you are ignoring any points I make that are relevant to the discussion and instead bring in this philosophical 'Steve Jobs' blather...
This is going no where, you think software is 95% art - your definition of what a product is seems to be where the effort was spent. This makes no sense in the context of this discussion and is NOT what I am discussing.
I'll be clear - I am not referring to effort. I am referring to what the thing 'is'... You can't seem to grasp that.
I think you are completely missing my point.
I am not saying and will never say that programmers are performing mathematical analysis and implementation when writing code (obviously this is the case some times). I am saying that the PRODUCT is math, not the thought process that goes into it.
And I agree that UI design is art. But that doesn't change a thing - the end result is a bunch of algorithms and art. The effort is art, the product is mostly math/algorithms.
Just because the programmer did not explicitly 'do the math' does not mean it's not there or is not relevant. Remember the context in which this discussion started..
Absolutely, I'm no conspiracy theorist. I just agreed that the source code is not the only vector for injecting backdoors.
Please vote this up..
Indeed, the vectors for adding back doors is not as simple as looking at source code.
No probs - just though an insult was a bit childish - but hey these things get missed in these forms..
Do you agree or disagree with the parent post? There are fundamental differences between the different examples you gave vs software?
I was not trying to make a sensible analogy, my point is that the effort or the cost has NOTHING to do with how much is art and how much is math (or algorithms if you prefer).
It certainly has a direct baring on the cost, time and labour, but still NOTHING to do with the quantity of art vs math.
If you are trying to say 95% EFFORT (man hours of work)goes in to art, then perhaps that might make sense (but I still wouldn't agree), but that would have no relevance to the original topic.
Sure it is, it's a simple algorithm, but an algorithm none the less.
Not quite - software is algorithms (math) regardless or how much artistic talent goes into its creation, it's still just algorithms (despite how well or poorly they are expressed in code).
My point was much more about the 95% & 5% assertion - what unit of measurement is used here - how did the OP come about these numbers? The are completely arbitrary and meaningless. It as useful as me saying "Music is 95% soul and 5% sound" - meaningless nonsense.
Sure games are part software (the algorithms - ie the game) and art (the stuff that makes the algorithms enjoyable and reach our senses) but to whack some arbitrary figure that games are 95% art is a massive distortion of reality.
Thanks for the nice leading insult - works really well.
But anyway, to steal a quote from elsewhere:
every algorithm is as mathematical as anything could be. An algorithm is an abstract concept unrelated to physical laws of the universe
Computer programs are JUST algorithms, nothing more... Gears and Levers have very physical characteristics and are not abstract. Music is a much closer analogy - though there are some not so subtle differences. Music is not an algorithm that takes input and produces output (like math or software), it is output only, it's akin to a story (which can also be represented mathematically as you suggest and that is meaningless in that context) but it is nothing like software (a set of algorithms).
Software is explicitly created as sets of algorithms, music while it can be 'expressed' as a mathematical algorithm (ie an algorithm can be found to describe or create it) it its self is not an algorithm in the same sense that software is.
The creation of the art for a game is insignificant compared to the generations of math contributing to the same game - the difference is the math is reused over and over again where as the art is typically a closer to a once use item (loosely). This can give the illusion that the game is all art, but that is only because most of the math (the algorithms that make the game work ) mostly existed before the game was ever considered - but it's still there, we can't ignore it just because the 'effort' in any specific game is small.
Sure there are lots of abstractions that hide a lot of math from the average developer - but these are just a simplification of the already existing algorithms (math) and doesn't make it irrelevant.
How can you fail to see that this describes the effort spent and has nothing to do with what the definition of the end product is or what percentage of the product is one thing or another...
Pro tip for thinking clearly and learning new things
Glad I'm talking to a pro...
As a pro, you should take the time to reflect on your own 'sensical' statements - and probably leave the high and mighty I'll tell you how dumb you are attitude in your pocket where you can reference it your self.
If you have a $150,000 house, you have about about $500 of light fixtures. Your house is less than 1% light fixtures.
No, my light fixtures COST less than 1% of the house. The COST has nothing to do with any measure of QUANTITY other than the cost.
To give another absurd example, if my house did in fact cost $150,000 and I then (stupidly) put in a $3m gold and diamond light fitting (that weights 1kg) then is my house comprised mostly of light fittings? No...
No, that was my point entirely - yes all my examples were completely non-sensical just as the original statement about 95% art 5% math.
I was trying to illustrate the absurdity of the statement, but you seem to have missed that.
Where you live maybe.
In some places it's typical to purchase your phone outright - i.e. no plans to hide costs in.
This has nothing to do with budgets or cost..
If my house cost $10 in bricks and mortar and $200,000 for light fittings. The house took 3 men 3 months to complete and the lights took 5 men 3 months to complete. My house is 99.99995% light fittings.
What's more, the math 'effort' was probably mostly implemented before the game was ever even thought of - but it is still there, even if it's effort free.
It has nothing to do with hours, salary, etc.
If the math was done 1000 years ago and still used today that still comprises part of that software - it's nothing about hours spent.
Most games are 95% art, 5% math, and 100% software.
Huh? that's some crazy statistics?
How much does math weigh compared to art?
How do you measure how much math there is compared to art? Is it the byte size of the executable (minus any embedded art) vs the byte size of the art?
I'm just confused how one could have any measure of either against each other...
My house is 99.99% bricks and mortar and 0.01% design... (using some arbitrary measure I just thought of)
A LOT of software has little to do with math.
Sorry, but ALL software is an expression of math..
how else do you explain poor people who vote against expanding medical coverage for poor people?
People make decisions without perfect information - not all decisions are based on a rational educated assessment .
I don't agree.
If the information had not yet been received by the pubic then the information was not yet public.
There were no guarantees that the message would reach its recipient until that event occurred.
Does the law/regulation take into account information travel time from the point of announcement in determining the order of events?
I don't know, but I'm pretty sure there has to be a possibility that the information has been received though. That's not really a nuance nor unrealistic.
(I've only read the summary, so...)
If there is a real relationship and effect, I expect it is related to the proportion of new information that a baby/toddler/young child needs to process.