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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:so what? (Score 1) 411

"Somehow, people around 45 years old (and females especially) REALLY lose their ability to problem solve or learn concepts."

I've been writing software for over four decades now.

Man, you are an old fart! You should move over and let us young un's with almost three decades of programming under our belts take over. You just know we're quicker, smarter and faster than you! 'Cos we're younger!

Hey, waitaminute ... what's this 25 year old doing here? What do you mean "65 hours a week"? Overtime? Are you mad? Hey, wait, let me back in... I'll be good, promise!

Comment: Re:She has a point. (Score 1) 598

by goose-incarnated (#49601519) Attached to: My High School CS Homework Is the Centerfold

Young girls (and older women) are constantly "attacked" (as a "never ending beauty contest") by what you describe in any environment (more if a mixed one with males) - in a class it is better to provide a less sexual environment (as possible, since full asexuality is unrealistic) in which females (and males) can concentrate in their studies.

I'm not going to address the "attacked" issue - magazines read by women, written by women, for women with nary a male involved in the process can hardly be the fault of men.

What I will ask is... how less sexual can you get from the headshot pic used? That's as asexual as it gets - face of a lady.

Comment: Re:She has a point. (Score 2) 598

by goose-incarnated (#49601365) Attached to: My High School CS Homework Is the Centerfold

I think his rhetoric question was just to show that the picture has a sexual notion. I am not so "sensitive" (and veeeryyy against modern "feminism"/"SJW's"/etc!), and i agree with you that "you can make a problem of anything", but using a picture with a sexual notion (even if not explicit) in a CS class (instead of a neutral) is inappropriate i think - many (if not most) young girls will not be so comfortable in such a situation while in class with some teenage boys.

Why wouldn't they be? Their (young girls) magazines are filled with scantily clad women in suggestive poses. So are magazines for young men. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that both young men and young women think women are more beautiful than men. I'm inclined to agree with them.

Comment: Re:Haskell? (Score 1) 134

by goose-incarnated (#49588907) Attached to: Paul Hudak, Co-creator of Haskell, Has Died

it really didn't see any use outside of academia and is now not much more than an afterthought.

Someone has to do those experimental language features that eventually filter down to the more often-used languages. Those people are generally in academia. If the academia didn't exist we'd get more carelessly-designed languages like Python and PHP.

Comment: Re:Haskell? (Score 2) 134

by goose-incarnated (#49588821) Attached to: Paul Hudak, Co-creator of Haskell, Has Died

my foundation of "that old crap" is what gives me an edge over all of these kids out there who can't program without pretty pictures.

However, I really do think that the subset of tasks where a functional approach will help is significantly smaller than you think.

While you may never use the functional approach, I find that knowledge of that functional approach is what gives me an edge ;-) It's not the functional approach that you use, it's the problem-solving ability that you gain that helps. For example, writing mini-DSL's in C++ is a damn sight faster if you're already used to the Lispish way of doing things. Writing anonymous functions in Java is a great deal easier after scheme thumped home the concept of closures (and lexical vs dynamic scoping).

Quite frankly, I find that the functional programming enthusiast crowd is a group of people who only know how to use hammers and they're trying to convince the world that every problem is a nail.

They are quite an annoying bunch, aren't they? I long ago stopped reading/posting to comp.lang.lisp purely because of the hostile and aggressive nature of that community. The NIH syndrome is especially strong with the lisp programmers - there's a reason that Lisp hasn't taken over the world even though it has all the language functionality present in almost every language that came after it (including Javascript, Java, C++, C#, Python, etc).

Comment: Re:Haskell? (Score 3, Insightful) 134

by goose-incarnated (#49588733) Attached to: Paul Hudak, Co-creator of Haskell, Has Died

The others bring almost nothing new to the party. Lisp, Erlang and Haskell all brought something new. Python, PHP and Rust didn't. Being functionally proficient in Lisp, Erlang and Haskell gives you skills that vastly improves your Java/C++/Whatever. Being proficient in Python and PHP gives you no new skills other than Python or PHP and perhaps some hipster cred.

I've got a 'kind of bingo card that I use to keep track of languages. I place checkmarks for each language depending on how it's different from all the other languages.

Help me out. Does Haskell require or not require a block after an "if" statement? Is the block introduced by brace, bracket, "then" or something else?

Or... does it use some completely lateral way to specify an "if" statement?

I may have to update my bingo card to accommodate.

I urge you (in the friendliest terms possible) to learn one of Lisp, Erlang or Haskell. Until you do you are going to continue assuming that the only differences between languages are purely cosmetic ones ("where does the brace go?", "how do you start a block?", etc). If you're going the Lisp route, pick a dialect of scheme.

TLDR; If the only language differences that you can imagine ever existing are cosmetic ones such as those in your post, then you have not been exposed to enough other languages.

As a quick example, using any language you know... can you /add/ to that language a feature that implements say... a switch/case statement (assuming that it didn't already exist, of course). How about an object system based on ... classes? If your language did not offer a way to define, create and instantiate objects would you be able to add the "class" keyword in? How about new operators? Every language lets you add functions, few let you add operators.

As it turns out, even though I hardly ever use those languages for anything these days, the deep possibility tree they open your eyes to gives you a more than passing mastery of concepts that all the other languages implement in an incomplete, half-assed way (looking at C++ lambdas here, btw).

Comment: Re:Haskell? (Score 1) 134

by goose-incarnated (#49588419) Attached to: Paul Hudak, Co-creator of Haskell, Has Died

He was known as one of the principle designers of Haskell, which you probably don't need to be told he defined as "a purely functional programming language."

I'm sorry, but this is the first time I ever hear about Haskell. There's just too many fringe projects, languages, frameworks, widgets and services out there, you can't know about them all.

The others bring almost nothing new to the party. Lisp, Erlang and Haskell all brought something new. Python, PHP and Rust didn't. Being functionally proficient in Lisp, Erlang and Haskell gives you skills that vastly improves your Java/C++/Whatever. Being proficient in Python and PHP gives you no new skills other than Python or PHP and perhaps some hipster cred.

Comment: Re:Its about child support (Score 2) 371

by goose-incarnated (#49579603) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

You go on a one night stand with a girl at a bar... use a condom... she says she's on the pill... she calls you six months 9 months later to tell you that you're a father... Congrats, you're playing child support.

What exactly is wrong with that? You both made a decision to have sex, knowing that contraception is not 100% reliable and that the other person could be lying, and decided to chance it. The result is that you created a baby, and you are held responsible for your actions.

Two people have sex and one is responsible? The problem is your are conflating "consent to sex" with "consent to children". Just because I give my consent for sex does not mean that I give my consent to become a father.

Consent to sex is not automatically consent to children!. Down that path lies madness for everyone - if you believe that consent to sex is the same as consent to children then you'd better be prepared to force females to carry their foetus to term - after all they gave consent, right?

It all comes down to this: do you believe that consent to sex automatically gives consent to children?

Comment: Re:The male gave consent... (Score 1) 371

by goose-incarnated (#49576367) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

That's like saying you can rape your wife because, at one point, she gave consent. It's completely idiotic.

Sorry, but by the time they've split up, he has withdrawn consent, and if she wishes to have a child he has the right to say "not with my sperm you don't". What's that, you now can't have children unless they're mine? Too damned bad.

This is very different from forcing her to abort a fetus, because it's outside of her body and frozen -- which means it's a tissue sample until someone goes to fairly extraordinary lengths to put it back.

I don't think this is nearly as cut and dry as people think. You can't just say "it's her egg, and he's already knocked her up" ... because she isn't pregnant, and this isn't about what she can do with her own body.

Is her ex legally required to have a child with her now that they've split up? Because it's not like in most cases you knock up your ex long after the breakup.

Suddenly a tissue sample in cold storage comes down to "can she force him to have a child with her now"? Because since it's not in her body, it's not like that is the deciding factor.

There are further implications to this: the laws are drafted so that a child is always entitled to maintenance from a parent. Should the courts let her have a baby and agree to regard him as merely a donor and thus relieves him of his obligations there is a greater than even chance that sooner or later a court will be forced to accept that letting a man say "I don't want this obligation" before the first trimester ends is very similar to letting a woman say "I don't want this obligation" before the first trimester ends. Two precedents - Women can already give up their obligation to the child/foetus AND court somewhere (hopefully with jurisdiction) already let a man say "I don't want this obligation".

Comment: Re:a scientific approach in the land of personhood (Score 1) 371

by goose-incarnated (#49576277) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

From a scientist: What the fuck is a pre-embryo.

Which scientist? I was a researcher for seven years, mind...

the disposition/custody of the pre-embryos is now hotly contested.

If the biomatter belongs to a specific person, then it is their biomatter. If you spit on a judge, your biomatter has incriminated you in the act of contempt. If you rape, then your vaginal secretion/sperm is accounted for by the prosecution during your trial as evidence and considered during sentencing. If you froze eggs, they're yours. At best the whole complaint here is a mysoginists tantrum.

Even leaving aside the fact that the biomatter in question belongs equally to both parties, you're still wrong and here's why: biomatter not attached to your body is not legally considered to be your part of your body. It's considered medical waste or similar and as such it is handled by the legal system as any other property; IOW you may be found responsible for it but you're certainly not going to be the default owner of it. You'll be accountable but with none of the privileges of ownership.

Comment: Re:Both own half. (Score 4, Interesting) 371

by goose-incarnated (#49576107) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

As with any business contract, party B would be free to buy party A out of their half of the contract. Presumably, this would absolve party A of owing any sort of child support later down the road.

Don't overcomplicate things. That's a good part of why our legal system is so corrupt.

You can't contract out of child support, much like you can't contract into slavery. You can write the contract, sure, but no court will enforce it. The only way to (currently) do so is to donate sperm to a state-endorsed sperm bank. If you simply just donate sperm you will still be on the hook for child support - this has already been tested in courts.

Comment: Re:Both own half. (Score 5, Insightful) 371

by goose-incarnated (#49575751) Attached to: Who Owns Pre-Embryos?

Each 'contributor' owns 50%. No decision regarding the subject pre-embryo may be be made without a majority. Case closed.

So, what? You want to divide it in two and give each party one half? The problem you are missing is that one party may want to dispose of the pre-embryo while the other party may want to (eventually) birth and raise it. Those are mutually exclusive options.

"Life, loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it." -- Marvin the paranoid android

Working...