Forgot your password?

Comment: Winning the lottery (Score 3, Interesting) 203

by msobkow (#47922841) Attached to: What To Expect With Windows 9

My Windows 7 laptop does everything I need for Windowsy stuff, so I won't be replacing or upgrading it unless I win the lottery.

Sadly, my 10+ year old 3.8GHz Pentium-pre-Core2 box is finally dying, so I'm in the midst of shifting my development and personal stuff over to the laptop. I've used Windows for years as a developer so it's not *too* painful, but I'm going to miss Linux. Linux just *works* without getting in my way; I can't say the same for Windows, even on trivial issues as to which widgets get auto-focused when you open them up (who is the brilliant idiot who came up with the idea that the file browser should focus on that damned library panel instead of the list of files?)

Comment: One of the best programmers I've known had a BA (Score 1) 336

by WillAdams (#47920567) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Any Place For Liberal Arts Degrees In Tech?

in Philosophy.

He'd written everything from operating systems to end-user applications and had a well-thumbed first printing of Knuth's TAOCP: Vol. 1 and was the person I brought my royalty check (for finding an error and a point of improvement in _Digital Typography_) in to work to show.

Comment: Re:Great idea! Let's alienate Science even more! (Score 1) 866

by msobkow (#47901057) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

The fundamental problem is you're confusing a mention of the near universal trait of humans to believe in some sort of "powerful other" controlling the universe. Some people are more prone to that "need" than others, but it *is* present in the vast majority of humanity, from those who hold deep religious convictions to those who go to worship once or twice a year for "big celebrations" and even to atheists who fall back on "scientific method" as some panacea of what is right and just and purposeful.

Rather, it is you who confuse "faith" with a fundamental urge to believe in something, whatever that something may be. One can have faith in processes, in kitschy homilies and phrases, and other such "wisdom" with no more "proof" of their validity than a theory of there being some form of god out there. Of course those who have such faith are far more inclined to call it "knowledge", and to consider it to be beyond reproach.

Faith and belief are not the same thing. Faith is acceptance of something as "fact" without evidence. Belief is acceptance of something because all prior experience has demonstrated the "fact" to be so.

Comment: Re:Great idea! Let's alienate Science even more! (Score 2) 866

by msobkow (#47898901) Attached to: Why Atheists Need Captain Kirk

The problem is even atheists still feel a need to believe in *something*. Which is silly. Planting Science as your God still means you have a God and are not an atheist.

Unfortunately, a lot of people aren't willing to accept the simple credo of "do good". Which really is all that most religions were ever telling people in the first place, with varying details of what they consider "good". People don't want to think about what "good" is -- they want someone to *tell* them so they can follow some leader like sheep.

Comment: Wah. (Score 1) 211

by msobkow (#47892079) Attached to: Kickstarter's Problem: You Have To Make the Game Before You Ask For Money

"We couldn't find somebody with deep pockets that we could sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Hconvince that we had a 'great idea', so we tried crowd-funding, and we couldn't find a 1000 idiots we could sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Hconvince to part with their money. Life is so unfair."

Look, buddy, the bottom line is "great ideas" are a dime a dozen. As a professional programmer who made a career out of slinging code, I've lost track of the number of "great ideas" people had that they wanted me to develop. They all claimed we'd be "rich", if only I would do all the work for them for free.

Without a demo, you're not showing you have what it takes to do the job. Even with the demo, you're not showing you have what it takes to handle the business side of things.

I mean, seriously, you want "angel investor" money for the "payout" of a "free copy of the game when it comes out?"

How many decades did people wait for the last "Duke Nukem", and that was from a reputable publisher who knew what they were doing!?

Why would anyone with a functioning brain cell trust your "great idea" to ever deliver?

Comment: Re:I never liked those state/city incentives (Score 4, Funny) 149

Now, now, you can't go criticizing sports teams when the N.F.L. is a non-profit organization which exists for the good of the game and to enhance the beneficial effects which the game has on society, right? I'm sure the goals of the other sports organizations are as noble and that their bookkeeping is similarly transparent.

I'm sure that it's some bizarre, pestilential outside influence which has banned community ownership of teams (save for the grand-fathered-in Greenbay Packers) and required that a minimum percentage of a team be owned by a single individual.

Comment: Re:Consider owner !=user (Score 1) 471

by msobkow (#47875951) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Smartwatch Apps Could You See Yourself Using?

You're missing out on the fact that every one of these so-called "smart" watches requires a smart phone to do the heavy lifting.

As they stand, they can not do one single thing of the items you listed without a phone. And if you have the phone for those situations, you don't *need* the watch.

Comment: Re:Trendy != popular (Score 1) 380

by WillAdams (#47867799) Attached to: Unpopular Programming Languages That Are Still Lucrative

``Almost no one'' != none, therefore, some people are using Haskell in HFT by your own admission.

I cited a source which noted Haskell is used for such --- do you have a citation for that number / proportion being very low?

Looking through the first page of Google search results for ``high frequency trading programming languages'' Haskell is noted as being advantageous for its ability to prove correctness of a program.

Comment: Re:Trendy != popular (Score 5, Interesting) 380

by WillAdams (#47863881) Attached to: Unpopular Programming Languages That Are Still Lucrative

Three words:

High frequency trading

Most of the code driving that is written in Haskell, which is just criminal, since it's some very bright people writing that code, and they're not contributing in any meaningful way to humanity, just fiddling bits to determine who has how much of what money at the end of each trade.

Yes, we will be going to OSI, Mars, and Pluto, but not necessarily in that order. -- Jeffrey Honig