Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:9 Days Relative To What? (Score 1) 35

by mattwarden (#47643189) Attached to: Online Tool Flagged Ebola Outbreak Before Formal WHO Announcement

that's all great, but accepts the premise that it detected anything. i could have a program that emails myself every day reporting an ebola outbreak and eventually i would have completely destroyed both the WHO's announcement speed and these clowns. of course, that is absurd, because the number of false positives is huge. and this is absurd for the same reason. there is zero information about false positive rates, and without that this "news" is saying absolutely nothing. the journalists, as usual, are complete fucking idiots who can't process basic logic, and as a result it seems like they are pretty much reprinting the press release from the group that developed the system (who should, and probably does, know better).

Comment: Conspiracy theories (Score 1) 134

by mattwarden (#47615093) Attached to: Aaron's Law Is Doomed and the CFAA Is Still Broken

No conspiracy required. A bill that very few people know about and far fewer would actually have affect their vote pattern or donations has very little chance of going anywhere. Every bill is an opportunity for riders and house-senate conference shenanigans, so I am pretty sure things are working correctly when this goes nowhere.

Comment: Re: Bubbles (Score 1) 130

by mattwarden (#47607499) Attached to: Inside the Facebook Algorithm Most Users Don't Even Know Exists

Social media... You mean having friends with a similar worldview? Are we sure social media even makes this worse and not better? Most people interact in real life with very few people because it is expensive to do otherwise. Social media might actually reduce the problem by making it cheaper to interact with more people. Theoretically it could be just more of the same viewpoint, but as n increases, the chance that everyone agrees on everything is much less.

Comment: Re:Tool complexity leads to learning the tool (Score 1) 240

by mattwarden (#47596647) Attached to: Getting Back To Coding

pretty simple, and i think i and others have stated it multiple times now. you said:

> Every IDE places everything you edit ultimately into files, text files to be precise.
> The idea that something only runs in the IDE and otherwise no one knows how it works is just nonsense

This is wrong. You would have never said this if you were not coming from a point of view of (admitted) ignorance in a number of technologies. You then assumed it was just ignorance due to your avoidance of Microsoft technologies. Sorry, but that is not the case. Many 4th gen languages will have this problem. Other languages that have a "visual" component for GUI editing or the like will likely have this problem.

Bottom line: you made a blanket assertion as if you knew the universe of the topic, and it turns out you know only a subset of that universe that happens to support your assertion. It's a bit like living in America and assuming every other country is like America, since that is what you know and have experienced. I don't fault you for not having experienced it; but I do fault you for being too confident that you have already seen the world.

Comment: Re:Tool complexity leads to learning the tool (Score 1) 240

by mattwarden (#47596613) Attached to: Getting Back To Coding

Version control is not a problem. But I suspect you are referring to merging code, which is a problem. SSIS 2012 made this a bit better, but in most cases you have to fall back to a manual merge using the IDE. Alternatively, one person works on a particular SSIS package (unit of code) at a time. The latter is not as crazy as it sounds, so long as you follow ETL best practices that lead to very simple, small, modular packages.

There are plenty of resources on the interwebs that can explain the value of 4th gen ETL solutions.

Comment: Re:Tool complexity leads to learning the tool (Score 1) 240

by mattwarden (#47585857) Attached to: Getting Back To Coding

> Erm, if you want to point out that MS IDEs don't put stuff you work with into files, then say so.

Um, I already did. That was the point of my reply. You effectively cannot edit the SSIS output except in the IDE. Theoretically, could you? Yes. But you could also theoretically manually edit binary files, too. The point is that the SSIS "text files" might as well be binary and it's really only reasonable to find a recognizeable section (like a SQL query) in the garbage and edit that. Editing beyind that sort of thing is not doable.

Your "nonsense" claim was from a POV of limited exposure, and frankly it's not just limited by avoiding MS technologies. There are a number of IDEs, especially in the 4th gen language space, where you simply cannot edit outside of the IDE.

Comment: Re:1 or 1 million (Score 1) 274

by mattwarden (#47572137) Attached to: Verizon Now Throttling Top 'Unlimited' Subscribers On 4G LTE

You are splitting hairs. As with anything in law, there are exceptions. I would argue that the fact that the fruit cocktail exception is so well known is because it's an oddity. I don't think your referenced section on wikipedia would have ever been authored if it was just yet another example of the base case. But also I am not sure this is even an example of what we're talking about. We are talking about product names. You are giving examples of product categories. What you're saying is that a fruit salad cannot market itself as a member of the fruit cocktail product category unless it meets certain criteria. Could "fruit cocktail" also be in the name? Sure. But it could also not be in the name and still need to abide by the rule you cite, so it is not an issue of name. Likewise with cuts of meat and different fruits. These are not dealing with product names. They are dealing with assertions that a given thing is a member of a defined product category.

So for your examples to apply, you would need to argue that "Verizon's unlimited data plan" is a member of a product category called "unlimited data plans" that has certain attributes. You could certainly make this argument, but it seems to have a small chance of being compelling.

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." -- William James