Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: "Open Sourcing Testing Frameworks"? (Score 1) 65

So how do you "test for correct behaviour of the products, overall"? It's not that hard to spell out -- and even automate -- the cases that a person expects to occur. The problem is accurately modeling the state space of the program and then figuring out which walks through it are incorrectly permitted. Even the most sophisticated known approaches fall down for the first part of that problem due to the vast size of an interesting program's state space.

Comment Re: Senior Engineer? (Score 1) 65

I think you're mostly agreeing with the OP. The SEI will certainly tell you that most software development is not done with enough rigor to be called engineering. In large part, that's because most software people do not know how (or do not bother) to elicit and manage requirements well -- so cheers to you for doing that. (Good verification skills and planning for traceability are the other places that typical software projects fall short, IMO.)

Comment Re: Already here - it feels unfair to some (Score 1) 412

The OP was incoherent for multiple reasons: Grossly confusing the number of people who would have to be sacrificed in order to double everyone else's wealth, claiming that sacrificing them would actually double everyone's wealth, thinking that forcibly redistributing that would yield anywhere near the paper value of the underlying assets, thinking it would do much to help the people it was given to, and so on. If you say that "1%" in the context of global wealth distribution meant something very different to the OP than "$77,000 of net worth", you may be right, but that is yet another point where OP is wrong in an easy-to-discover way.

Your silly obsession over what qualifies as a "welfare mom" misses the point. Most people would not accept confiscating a doctor's house and medical practice to pay more money to people who live off welfare, or confiscating the home and retirement assets from a couple of 60-year-old middle-class people to build a new mud hut for a subsistence farmer in Elbonia (which is about how far the money would go after all the bureaucrats along the way take their cuts), but that is what the OP was proposing to "double the world's wealth". Fussing about "welfare moms" and whose sob story justifies sucking at the public teat is a refusal to address the legitimate objections to that kind of redistribution.

Comment Re: Already here - it feels unfair to some (Score 1) 412

The global 1% for wealth is a net worth of about $77,000. At least in the US, doctors easily cross that threshold, as do most near-retirees. It's just that near-retirees usually have that in illiquid assets like their homes or in well-regarded assets like retirement funds (even if those retirement funds are usually not at a level that retirement advisors say is wise).

Welfare moms make excuses to turn why they don't want to work into why they can't work. Most people find a way. One woman I went to college with is now a single mom, raising an autistic kid, but she still works rather than depend on welfare.

Comment Re: Yeah, sure (Score 1) 412

No, my argument against your unnamed "study" (undoubtedly made by someone who got the result they were looking for and who published their study in a journal refereed by their fellow travelers) is that they had thumbs on the scale the whole way. Social sciences are even more dismal, and less sound, than economics. It's trivial to lie with statistics in that kind of analysis, and the gatekeepers are almost all way out on one side of the policy spectrum, so they object to flaws in papers from their perceived domestic enemies but less similar flaws pass in papers from their "friends". Should I cite all the recent studies showing how academic closure and credentialism has led to near monoculture in many fields?

Comment Re: Next up: Social media "likes"? (Score 2) 195

That still doesn't make sense, unless you mean to say that my friends don't have permission to send me emails, which is clearly an untenable proposition. In this situation, Amazon is suggesting and facilitating the sending of an email by my friend, which is almost exactly the same as something showing up on my social event stream -- Facebook suggests and facilitates the "like" being sent, Amazon suggests and facilitates the "email" being sent.

Comment Re: Regulation; is there no harm it cannot bring? (Score 3, Informative) 66

Why do you say they are technically savvy? Their marketing appears to be savvy, but all the impartial stories I've seen (including from Reason, which is usually against regulators and incumbents who benefit from regulations) give the impression of dodgy technology at Theranos.

Slashdot Top Deals

Just about every computer on the market today runs Unix, except the Mac (and nobody cares about it). -- Bill Joy 6/21/85