If you don't mind my asking...

Yeah any true "geek" understands that the existence of mixins implies their base classes don't really exist. Right?

I mean, look at how many people think evolution is "just a theory", and you might start to realize just how dangerous a little knowledge is in the hands of morons.

Gosh, its almost as bad as those morons who claim that "race is just a social construct"!

Seriously, the problem with a little knowledge is it is too little. The social chaos results from people throwing data away and that starts with designating certain kinds of discrimination off limits to private parties making their own decisions, as does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 507-514 (April 2009)

When does age-related cognitive decline begin?

Timothy A. Salthouse
Received 17 April 2008; received in revised form 20 August 2008; accepted 12 September 2008. published online 24 February 2009.

Abstract
Cross-sectional comparisons have consistently revealed that increased age is associated with lower levels of cognitive performance, even in the range from 18 to 60 years of age. However, the validity of cross-sectional comparisons of cognitive functioning in young and middle-aged adults has been questioned because of the discrepant age trends found in longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses. The results of the current project suggest that a major factor contributing to the discrepancy is the masking of age-related declines in longitudinal comparisons by large positive effects associated with prior test experience. Results from three methods of estimating retest effects in this project, together with results from studies comparing non-human animals raised in constant environments and from studies examining neurobiological variables not susceptible to retest effects, converge on a conclusion that some aspects of age-related cognitive decline begin in healthy educated adults when they are in their 20s and 30s.

My comment:

Speaking as one of those aging boomers, age profiling is OK. So is racial, gender, sexual preference and religious profiling. We operating in a mysterious and complex world while suffering from a poverty of information. It's all about getting all the data you can, baby... its all about the data...

"What documentation?"

The story ends there. "Josh" is no coding genius. He's a business genius. He understands that business nowadays is all about rent-seeking. Rent-seeking is looking for a parasitic niche from which you can milk the system with impunity, until the system collapses.

How could anyone learn any other lesson from the goings-on in Washington, D.C. and Wall St. nowadays?

Boy, I guess you really got my number there because one day I said:

Let q(x) be a property provable about objects x of type T. Then q(y) should be true for objects y of type S where S is a subtype of T.

and you know what the damn boss said?

"You're fired."

Here I thought he'd be impressed...

If this "blowhard" didn't care about getting CS out that condition.

Aside from academic pissing contests you have a much more immediate worry: The lack of bankruptcy protection afforded student loans coupled with the trend in life-time income prospects for CS graduates.

Liskov says: "Today the field is on a very sound foundation."

If only it were true.

I recall, in fact, the point in time when I first ran across Liskov's CLU in the context of working one of the first commercial distributed computing environments for the mass market, VIEWTRON, and determining the real problem with distributed programming was finding an appropriate relational formalism.

We're still struggling with the object-relational impedance mismatch today. The closest we are to finding a "solid basis" for computer science is a general field of philosophy called "structural realism" which attempts to find the proper roles of relations vs relata in creating our models of the world.

If anything, our descriptions should be "relations all the way down" unless we can find a good way, as some are attempting, to finally unify the two concepts as conjugates of one another.

Law is code*.

Legislation is a change to the code.

The legislative process is change control.

*It is perhaps not entirely coincidental that the "code base" of law in the US is designated by the prefix "United States Code".

Put some lye and aluminum foil in a big bowl of water. Once the aluminum is consumed and you have witnessed a whole bunch of hydrogen come off, don't put any more lye into the water, but do put some more aluminum foil into it. Watch it get consumed too as it produces more hydrogen. Repeat until you see how silly TFA is.

If you actually look at the ocean floor -- all over the Earth -- with Google Earth, especially at higher magnification, you'll notice all kinds of areas that have right angles to them. These artifacts are from improper image processing of tiled images from various satellites or various rectangular images from the same satellite. This sort of bug makes it very difficult to use Google Earth for looking at the ocean floor.

I worked on one of the most widely deployed automated toll road systems and it was pretty obvious that the strategic direction was to address the emerging market of corrupt politicians selling off public roads to private interests for instant money now.

Problem is, when you have everything automated the only people with money to pay the tolls will be the owners. Of course, maybe that's the point. I mean who wants all that traffic congestion? In fact, who wants all that population?

Low earth orbit (LEO) is about 22k miles lower than Geostationary Orbit (GSO) and collisions are very rare in GSO due to the ~0 relative velocity of the satellites there.