Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Walk before you can run code (Score 1) 627

by tttonyyy (#46329219) Attached to: Does Relying On an IDE Make You a Bad Programmer?

No, no, no! This is Slashdot, we need a car analogy:

Does relying on pre-made rubber tires make you a bad driver?

That's a terrible analogy.

A better one would be saying something like "Don't use ECU diagnostic interfaces to find out what's wrong with your engine - that's cheating - a real mechanic would just take it apart to see what's wrong!"

In a similar way to the ECU telling you what is up, you still need an underlying knowledge of engine mechanics in order to use the information it provides effectively. Sometimes it will be misleading. The same goes with IDEs and coding. Sure you can write everything in vi/emacs if that takes your fancy, but you won't be as efficient as if you use a decent IDE, but that's not to say you should trust the IDE entirely.

Comment: Re:IDEs are good. UI builders are bad. (Score 2) 627

by tttonyyy (#46329101) Attached to: Does Relying On an IDE Make You a Bad Programmer?

IDEs with any form of wizard for "creating stuff" potentially take away the underlying understanding that a programmer might use to come up with something better.

But, for code navigation, a good IDE is totally indispensable, particularly with large codebases of someone else's code. What could be more useful than hovering your mouse pointer over a structure variable and having a little window show you how it was declared and what members it has? Or telling you all the places the current function is called from?

A good IDE shouldn't get in the way of coding, but nor should it take over the coding for you.

Comment: Re:Kicking up the lundar dust (Score 2) 250

by tttonyyy (#45690237) Attached to: Chinese Lunar Probe Lands Successfully

Not even the Chinese can claim a planet.

It's a moon, not a planet, but since we're talking on your level... if you look on the other side there is a huge "MADE IN CHINA" sign and a big array of bitcoin ASICs that they used for their 51% attack. More hashing power than Uruguay. That's how they bought the fake landing sets off NASA!

Comment: Re:Tesla (Score 1) 327

by tttonyyy (#45466743) Attached to: Monthly net electricity use in my household:

I drive oil, but it's catalytically cracked veg oil.

The heating process for dewatering and then distilling excess Methanol off afterwards takes a fair bit of energy (16kWh) but over the course of a year and making 2500 litres it adds up to less in electricity costs than running a home server 24/7 (50W).

So I'm firmly in the 500-999kWh range.

Comment: Retina burn (Score 1) 93

by tttonyyy (#45413817) Attached to: Demo of Prototype Virtual Retinal Head Mounted Display

Less deeply cool if the mirror control software locks up and you burn a line/spot into your retina.

Trying, plasma TV style, to run noise/wipes material through it to reduce retina burn-in would not be fun.

On the other hand, nice to see another step towards the Snow Crash universe. Just need a depleted uranium hypervelocity railgun and people will finally start listening to Reason.

Comment: Re:How many does it take? (Score 2) 358

by tttonyyy (#45085253) Attached to: 90% of Nuclear Regulators Sent Home Due To Shutdown

Checklist:

1. Is it glowing?
2. Is there a smoking, glowing crater where the plant used to be?

If both are no, the back to napping.

Perhaps an urban legend (I can't find a reference), but didn't operators of nuclear reactors used to sit on one legged chairs, so they couldn't nap at the controls?

Comment: Re:What could possibly go wrong? (Score 1) 358

by tttonyyy (#45085119) Attached to: 90% of Nuclear Regulators Sent Home Due To Shutdown

In all fairness nothing is likely to go wrong unless a reactor is being experimented on, or an unusual catastrophic event/mechanical failure occurs (even a fully staffed reactor doesn't necessarily mean they'll be avoided). Lack of staffing should be the least of our worries!

Comment: Re:Never gonna happen. (Score 4, Insightful) 472

by tttonyyy (#45037903) Attached to: How long before most automobile driving is done by computers?

Perhaps a few of the less competent might opt for it but us race car drivers will never stand for it.

Ironically racing is probably a better defined operating environment so easier to successfully automate.

I can't see everyday driving being automated because there will always be a scenario that isn't covered, an odd bug that no-one expected, or mechanical failure that the computer can't compensate for in a sensible way.

Commercial flight systems on aircraft must be so thoroughly tested, yet we still have pilots to take over if the machine fails. How would that work with cars? If you have to be there paying close attention in case you need to take over, doesn't that negate the purpose of the automated system in the first place?

This login session: $13.76, but for you $11.88.

Working...