bryze

Is it time to break up tech monopolies? I think the writing is on the wall.

I wonder what proportion would be willing to relocate either direction, or is that not the idea? Long distance never worked out for me.

Maybe I'm just old, but I still think wearing headphones conveys a detached air. My reaction isn't as strong as the 1981 interview, but it's there. Anyone else feel that way?

Yeah, I was wondering if a virtual machine is safe from malicious attacks, though. Can anyone comment on the feasibility of this method as fail-safe?

You beat me to it. It seems especially ironic right now.

An excellent summary. Trying to get everyone in China to speak Mandarin would be like getting everyone in Europe to speak English. It will never be 100% unless you obliterate other languages.

Should public figures be held responsible for the actions of their fanatics?

Is that the only character you tried? Try writing "論" and see what happens..

Well argued, by far the clearest rebuttal I've read so far and I concede. I just hope that the rules of thumb they listed for "good science" are prioritized as listed, because I really believe content should be the key consideration.

Yes it does, but that doesn't make their arguments valid. My whole point is not to keep experts out, but to judge the content on its scientific merit alone.

To clarify. The bullet points are listed under "Marks of Good Science". Holding a degree does not mean your publications or claims are good science. It's fine if Ted wants to only have degree holders as speakers, but they should be clear that it's a bias they've chosen, not "good science".

Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Along the same vein: "The proposed speaker works for a university and/or has a phD or other bona fide high level scientific qualification". Many of the points they list are valid, but this conspicuous appeal to authority makes me much less inclined to watch the talks.

Amen. About the only thing I learned is that if I want to read flamboyant editorial I'll go to Dan Lyons.

Does anyone else think that this article is a Satire? I think it's actually an appeal to common sense. What I read is the author is sad that programming is not moving in the direction of an emergent engineering discipline, sad that popularity, not reason, drives the acceptance of languages.

More people need to do this. It seems that among adults, the most effective message you can send is "goodbye". Sad, but, in my experience, true. Even then, some people will never learn.

The ironic thing to me is that in order to enforce the idea of an Internet Bill of Rights, you have to throw anonymity out the window. How do you defend an anonymous user in court?

It's not a bad idea, but how do we defend the anonymous users?

I admit, that's a good point.

Do you actually believe that he's being honest? Sounds like he's puffing up to try and discourage them. When you're up against people who bring you into the legal ring, it might be a bad idea to show them that you're penniless.

I have my own ideas about how to do this, and I'm glad someone is moving in this direction, but I must ask, is this a stepping stone in a grander vision? Enemies of software development today are:

1. Code Comprehension: Can new people quickly understand a complex code base enough to implement significant features. 2. Fault Diagnosis: When is the last time you spent less than 50% of a project's time on debugging? 3. Code Transformation: Have you ever actually tried to factor a mega-function into separate functions? How about creating a set of concrete classes when you realize that your hierarchy abstraction breaks down under new requirements. Now do all that without introducing new bugs.

These are the hard problems, and it excites me that people are thinking about how to solve them. This tool will not solve all those problems, and maybe one tool shouldn't, but nevertheless I hope people will start thinking about the entire development process and how to improve all the tools of our industry.

That blog entry was pretty non-technical. Does anyone have a clue why this might be happening? It's not like 江 is in any way uncommon.

Thanks, Peroni. I was pretty much going to say this is some of the worst advice I've seen yet, but you gave a better summary.

Heartless verdicts like this make my blood boil. There is no way he caused that much damage industry profits, and now his life is basically ruined. How can a judge look himself in the mirror knowing the gavel that came down so unmercifully was his own?

Really nice game. That's the sort of elegant finish I always hope for in my games.

Here are some courses that changed my life: Intro to Abstract Math, Non-Euclidean Geometry, Symbolic Logic, Music Theory, Theory of Computation, Computer Architecture, Compilers, Computer Graphics, Animation, Performance Evaluation, Critical Thinking, Linear Algebra, Elementary Physics. I was a different person after completing each of these courses. I spent about 40k total for a Bachelor's and Master's degree in Computer Science. For arming me with needed skills and establishing a broad foundation that permits me to think outside a narrow discipline when it's called for, I'd say it's worthwhile. Anything that accomplishes this is good. Right now that's college.

I concede some schools are a better value, and some majors are not going to make you financially successful. I think that should be the discussion.

I like to read about new ideas, advances in science and technology, and political developments, especially where the Internet is concerned. I accept that people have different lifestyles and viewpoints, and if variations on those sorts of things are presented as "hey, here's a different way to live", then that's alright. On the other hand, if the message is "hey, do it this way because I'm right" then I'm inclined to stop reading.

Can we find better things to write about than this? It is getting really boring reading about how other people think we should all behave.

What a great read; thanks for posting it. While the reported outcome differed from the Rolling Stone article, the FBI's modus operandi appear the same.

I agree, in principle, but I wonder if the Feds would make a trip downtown to bail out their snitch first.

I think you make a strong argument. Here's a question: What happens when the smart anarchist turns in the snitch to the local police department with full documentation of conspiracy to commit a terrorist act?