I'm going to go with this:

The vast majority of programming is fairly simple manipulation of states and symbols, which are themselves a small subset of numbers. yes and no are 1 and 0, etc.

The way those manipulations work together quickly becomes very complex.

You can do a boatload of things with just that knowledge. Entire video games. Many types of process control and dedicated controllers. Most reasonable scripting jobs, most "webby" stuff, database stuff, etc.

But then adding some knowledge of math, in the purely technical sense, gives us more symbols to manipulate, and more ways to manipulate them, and this, like any major skills enhancement, definitely makes you a better programmer. Some mid-level math concepts -- very simple in nature, actually -- amplify what you can do so much it's just amazing.

I suspect -- I can't actually tell you because my math is only mediocre to fairly good, nor have I ever knowingly come in contact such a person -- that *really* advanced math skills combined with *really* advanced programming skills (which I can lay claim to) would combine to create a true monster programmer.

But...

I think there's something about the essentially concrete nature of programming, and the incredibly abstract nature of higher math, that makes these dual-facet powerhouses the rarest of the rare. In my experience -- admittedly, just one person's career -- serious math heads tend to be pretty lousy programmers. Lots of bugs, poor structure, little to no sensitivity to shortcuts and loading. Then really great programmers seem to be only sorta capable with math (although what they can do with what they have tends to be quite surprising.) Just an IMHO based on my experience. Something I've found interesting enough to contemplate many times. Having said that, I sure would like to meet Mr. or Ms. combination-o-both. :)

For those who don't read articles, this appears to happen if you don't auto-update your software

So it's like Windows?

Programmers are massively underpaid compared to the skillset we need to do our jobs.

Considering the lousy end products I have to deal with on a daily basis, paying programmers more money won't improve the skillset. You want to be paid more money? Produce a better product.

As to the products I'm talking about, let's start with Oracle and SAP then move on to Microsoft itself, Apple, HP and Siemens to name the most used ones I deal with.

It's not about numbers. And it's not about validity. It's about manufacturing PC/media panics and distracting the public from real problems by fomenting pointless opposition on non-issues.

I'm all for open source women (girls, chicks, Ms's, whatever the PC term is today, sigh). I can think of just an issue or two I'd like to reprogram.

Wait, what? That's not...

Never mind then.

Well, let's see how "shocked" you are when the "well-reasoned, evidence-backed, meaty, professional arguments" result in your surfing becoming a lot slower, and any websites YOU decide to publish somehow don't get much traffic, because people won't wait on slow websites, as is well known. Yeah, I'll bet you'll just be happy as a clam with that, won't you? You won't see any evidence of the system being broken then, either, will you? Clearly, the problem will resolve itself you only just educate yourself a little more (presumably with what benefits the corps, and not you.)

Sure. Brilliant.

Which is exactly what he gave them. What is an engine rated in? Horsepower. Eats less hay, though, and doesn't crap directly on the street.

Yep. Just like the rest of the government. Citizen input is an illusion at best, and even then, only one that takes in the highly gullible and blindly nationalistic.

And to the mods: The A/C's comment was harshly sarcastic, but that is entirely appropriate in this circumstance. Modding the A/c (parent) comment down is stupid. It's topical, accurate, and to the point. Mod it back up. Mod mine down instead if you must mod something down just to vent your spleens, or whatever your problem is.

When the word "globally" is used in context with a subject that directly affects the globe, it's not a metaphor for (local) completeness, it means "everywhere on the globe." This is basic English.

It's been a consistently cool and wet spring and summer in the northern plains of the USA. This data is relative to the region of the northern plains, and is comprehensive within that region, but not globally. This data cannot, by itself, be interpreted as a global indicator, regardless of if it agrees or disagrees with the global data. One would not say "It has been globally cool and wet" based upon data for the northern plains.

Global climate data (you know, for the globe) will include data from all regions of the globe in order to determine a global average weather datum of any kind -- temperature, rainfall, etc. Anything less is regional. "It has been regionally cool and wet in the US northern plains this spring and summer."

Let me just say that, if you offer a trip to space as the companion event to drinking this water, I will drink and I will go. :)

What you need, son, is a homeopathic cure for your gullibility.

Evolution doesn't deal with life or death

You lack a realistic understanding of evolution, I'm afraid. Time for some remedial study.

++no

This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

Nature -- specifically evolution -- disagrees. You don't get a vote.

So Tesla's anti-theft system is 100% lethal?

No, but evolution's anti-massive-stupidity system is pretty lethal. Less so nowadays, but... still.

"Hey, think I'll drive triple digits in a randomly active urban environment in a vehicle I'm not familiar with, while (justifiably) paranoid!"