"Yeah it makes no sense. They have separate categories for Software Engineer, Programmer, and Software Developer."

You wouldn't say that if you were a software developer or a software engineer.

A programmer can take a specification and implement it. For example he can be told: "Create a module with function that takes two arguments from the databse and stores their product back into the database.* He may even be able to take a set of specs and write all the code for the project.

A Software Developer on the other hand knows how to do requirements gathering and analysis, create time lines and cost projections, recommend and implement solid Source Code Control mechanisms (In other words they use git in 2015)

Above that level of competence is the Software Engineer. They understand various development models (e.g. Waterfall, Iterative/Spiral, etc.) and paradigms (e.g. Structured, Object Oriented, Event Driven) , and patterns such as Idempotence, singletons, etc.).

* One other difference between a programmer and the Software Dev or Engineer is that the programmer thinks this is easy, and the latter two know that there can be a lot more involved than you might imagine

II can't imagine what could go through someone's mind that they would even consider that 'boring' vs. 'not-boring' is even something to look at when deciding which technology to use, with the sole exception that all other things being equal clearly the more exciting one will pay bigger dividends due to increased developer interest.

What constitutes a boring technology? Say I agree with you that COBOL is boring; will Johhny down the road agree with us, or will it fascinate him? Now, let's say that we all universally agree that COBOL is some boring ass technology (unless you rode the short bus to school, I think we can :-). Should I really design my new project around it?

OK. Now on to the actual reading of the article:

"Let's say every company gets about three innovation tokens"

OH ... how about let's not and say we didn't. So basically, the author claims to be a skilled software developer, but can't figure out that subjective criteria isn't your best bet when analysing data sets, and who can't figure out that you need a premise that isn't absurd to churn out a non-absurd result.

"What counts as boring? That's a little tricky."

Yes, well that explains why you never actually even attempt to address the question so fundamental to the understanding of your entire theory then, I suppose, isn't it?

"Taking this reasoning to its reductio ad absurdum would mean picking Java, and then trying to implement a website without using anything else at all. And that would be crazy. You need some means to add things to your toolbox."

Can't you use old 'boring' technology in this case? Don't use Mongodb; use Mariadb/MySQL. Old; tried and true; as 'boring' as it gets by this guy's implied but never stated definition.

... and I just went back and read the subtitle under "Dan McKinley", to wit: Math, Programming, and Minority Reports." Sir, if you are reading this, I have no doubt you are far better a Mathematician than I, but you seem to have made the mistake of thinking that being good at Math and being able to write a few scripts has placed you in a position to pontificate poignantly on subject matter with which you have no actual grasp. Please leave the Software Engineering to the Software Engineers, and I promise not to try to write papers in Math journals. Thanks!

Yes, I have to concur. I was complete baffled, trying to imagine what kind of person would be tech savvy and not appreciate the value of autocomlete in life. Then I noticed pattern. Since I prefer not to respond to an AC unless they are saying something truly unique or it is blatantly clear that they are legitimately trying to add to the conversion, I kept reading and waiting to find a good one to which I might respond. Someone logged in or writing something that remotely approaches a rational thought. Perhaps it is coincidence, but I gave up trying to find a dissenter that wasn't an AC, or was an AC that seemed sincere.

"1. Runs under all operating systems and platforms"

Nothing like starting out of the gate with impossible to achieve goals.

So you are saying Oxford knows it isn't a verb. I suppose that is why it is still considered the go to source then, isn't it :-)

Language evolves? True. Lowercase is a verb? False. See how easy it was to understand both facts together!

You seem to be of the mistaken impression that pointing to an online definition proves something. Using your technique everything is a word! "Mah Niggaz!" is valid English if you buy into the "If enough people mangle it it becomes correct" bullshit. One can readily determine from your link that "lowercase", while not a verb, has been commonly misused as one beginning in 1908.

No. You are missing the big picture. You can "lowercase" the P all you want (erroneously) but don't surround it in quotes, and don't use "lowercase" without quotes since it isn't actually a verb.

You keep prattling on like you have something to teach; you'd do far better to accept the fact that you lack a basic understanding of the English language. Don't feel bad. I don't speak whatever your primary language is and so I give you credit for grasping my language to the level that you have! I have no doubt that I would perform equally as miserably if I tried to teach you lessons in whatever language it is that you know how to speak and write properly.

In this case Physics has been anthropomorphized and so just as you would write: Bill didn't kill him; John did" one would also write,as I did, "Billy isn't the one who runs around killing people; Physics is the slimy grease-ball that goes around killing people!"

That's two English lessons I gave you now for free; fancy a third intellectual and philosophical beating?

PCIe is not Apple proprietary standard so your post is just a babbling stream of surreal non-sequitur,

It's actually pretty humorous to see how many Grammar Nazi's have no idea what they are talking about. The sentence could certainly be re-written to make it more clear, but you absolutely couldn't put a semi-colon after Samsung. You would literally be taking a syntactically correct though awkward sentence and converting it to a syntactically broken aggregation of words desperately wanting to make sense, but never quite getting there.

I can't figure out if you are a moron and a troll, or just a phenomenal moron

So you are saying that, ironically, you wont stand up to the truth about women and sexism because you don't have the balls to post with a non AC anonymous login?

You haven't seen Dice's ledger yet

You'd be wrong. If you didn't know, most women like VAGGS, but most also claim that VAGGS and DICCS are equally offensive.