WTF?! All those are too good together to try to separate out as basic proficiency 101.

P.S. Vee notes that of course there should *not* be an "All-of-the-Above 101" class that neglects just Shurikens (or any others there). Might even want to add some CowboyNeal requirement too tho?

I'd simply like to complement you're fucking awesome (in the Izzard hot-dog sence) applications of neurolly stimpulating, yet impressionistivly axcessably availiable, languistic devices to convey nuanced meaning && subtle analytical incites that are misfortunately loost on most dulled communicationers (even if /.'s 4um S2N ratio tends to XEd most otherz).

So: *Bravo, MolarMass192!* I happily concider us kindred spirits, irrespective of demonstratible wordsmything trick-or-treatments (just as the Grinch should be violating the "Intellectual Property" wrongs of the nitemare before [or on] the eve of this 2009 C.E. Christmas).

Shalom, friend, =)
-Pip

s/(you)r (buzzword)/$1're $2/ || .= 's are ';

Fuck that. You're unquotable, unless I'm lazy?
"A:I intuitively see \"solid\" approach is missing something.
BC:We don't.
A:...laborious proof...
BC:Now we too \"intuitively see\" the \"missing something\"...\$D" ||
"BC:We still don't.
A:...you-don't-know-laborious-proof \$Dproof...
D:Where's the almighty Dollar DD rinking DD ark SS emi-weet BB itter-etter? \"Great programmer\" fails to understand the business baby buggy bumper $w0r3buhx! IllegalOp. SegFault. BSOD. NoCarrier. Gack... gasp*@#!perl sputter Reese's PeanutButter, Betty Biddy bought some butter but she said \"This butter's bitter. If I put it in my bladder, it will make the badder biggestX0rz3r!\" WTFi push(@batter, $bitter_butter); #bb getn bb
*{$AUTOLOAD} =~ s/^b([aiaioueieiouy]?)tter/$1/gigigo; #phew
SoShiTe r0B0t $e ** $e ANSI Putin in ze @addr && it GNUmkz the snail-mail address puffier Daddy && it is a BlackAdder from GoldenAxe && it adz up Google, maws drop, gumEberz, MazalTov, momNpop, 2B2bUlus, KingFurKPher4skin00K... the fookinuck? THe !!11!!1!10hn0ezL0LC@z, dunn frackditupagin. Rebutter, rebuffer, repuzzle the castle. On Dasher on Donner, on Voxel && Vixen! Many h03z s3wN r03z cr0p halv hRvS. HapyHolEde
B:WholEdjd
C:ManEFold?
A:Intuitively!
ABC:Missing!3yp
NofuhKinGuey. Wait. Go. Goo. Gle. GoneN60thzOv0zSecantzCoTanArcGentile. Gentle. ManLee. SpiDw0mN. ClmXBx0r $bucks Bach's Pasamaquaddy. I don't fucking know. But it's fun to play one on TV."
You insensitive clod. I play a Zer0! I am a 0. Lehew-zeher. But Ace Ventura does have nerdy animal love. Kinda beastial. Kinda hot chix. Fun. Even more fun than having Men@W0rk Xplaind (XplAnd [Xpl&.]) thru FootLoose thru Wren McCormik thru Entourage thru BlacKIdPz0N3wY3arzuss... uhh fucking John Lithgow, Sarah Jessica Parker... deh Sex In The City, Damn how many degrees from Kevin "Norris" Bacon. Hey. Yoyoyoyo. How cum he sentchew? ... I volunteered! I needed a Hiro! Callin' out for a gyr0 till the Nd uf da nyt? Well you've got one. But he's gotta be better than bitter batter. Betty's cookies are bomb!
Pr0nGramRz just can't show for the $dola sliding thingz.
But you can kinda control being put on a crappy project with a bad deadline && a bad manager. Change them or have them change you. Whether that's along "bad" lines, "crappy" lines, project, manager, deadgoaletc. lines. Scan-lines. CocaineChrystalisVaporousWhereChoppedUhhpMathzematicalynzSpeedKills... Slower. Duh. Too fast. No don't. Howzat4SharedOperatingSystemInternalzCheatzSetFreeSoftware? RationalRealReasonRandomRounding&&Non-discriminatory. Everyone is discriminated against? Yeah. Duh. So the cocoa, chocolate, coffee, cocaine, cracks, crystal, CUCE, methemetical memetical meteorological neurobionic artifice of intelligence dreams of claiming consciousness its own personal bailiwick. Think again... && again.. while(1); You rest in that loop as long as you must && you will. You also simultaneously emerge elsewhere when you do. Sometimes when you must. It can be dusty or cloudy. The cloud can compute if your buzzword compliant. Are you savvy? Business savvy? JAPH. JustAnotherCunningLinguist(Common non-Lisper) JackOfLove AllTrades PokR Playing all the right cardz? WutRDodz? InfiniT/Zr0 (Rho? ToTally t0tLE) How can that even be computed? It was already done. When you did it? When you did it. No it wasn't before. Then once it is, it remains as having been done (maybe needing redoing, but eventually known). So eventually you can know everything that was done, but you don't want to. That ability is also designed to self-regulate in its own zeitgeist of interplay && interdependence (hence limited, seemingly contradictory independence). The paradoxes. The perplexities. They're purple magenta magnificent magnets. Maybe entering the IT field in general isn't recommendable anymore. Too many willing. Could be. I have doubts. So have A work out the proof for you or B, C, or D. Forgetting to remember.
Where do we leave off?
Programming may not be plumbing with goal-posts as changing subjects at all!
Fuck "What is efficiency?"! What is Delivery?! What's perfect? What would different values of "late" mean? Percents of perfection are presumptuous. Pretentious a bit, don'chathink? As if decimal fingers were the way math came about. Pot coffee black much? Sure out-of-context, out-of-bounds, beyond even metaphoric euphoric goal-posts (whose changes, or subjectivity, are of pleasing concern... even in somewhat legalese, no voiding where no prohibitions except those who can laboriously prove [oops, almost mispelt proove, thank G-d && godlyness in spell-checkers so that I wouldn't blunder so brazenly as to commit a folly of infinitesimal proportions as to make only meaningless errors when they are merely a minor hiccup in their midst, rather than introducing widespread ambiguity or implying precision while clandestine collaterals are eroding it faster] that new exceptions are warranted for the context in question, even to include new seemingly paradoxical, self-contradictory artifacts as the self-refuting prohibition prohibition (which obviously implicitly && intuitively prohibits all but itself within its realm for most interpretations, && some exceptions span the internations. Alternation characters classed in regular nuclear expressions of semi-executable language expulsions. Maybe you pick up... where you left off... or teleported hyperlinked to anywhere else. It'd be nice to be an employable programmer, who can afford rent, food, tech, && lawyers when they're some stupefyingly arcane line of defense. Alas, forlorn, only in the company of Zr0. Can't even work for myself (MasturzThesisPr0nDb8ng) in a stable way to produce money. Fscking primadonna GUI "expert" artistic emotional design coders writing diatribes && excreting cyphers. With their fancy cars && their not-considered-crazy-eccentric-enough-to-permanently-institutionalize. Oh wait. Their "great"s probably are considered nuts. Well do the best you can with whatever you've got left. If I could help anyone else, I would, but society says art is asylum-worthy in myriad instances. Forced incarceration && neuroleptic violation.

What's the key? The answer? The way to be paid? Join with others when you can, && pay with your attention. Happy Channukah (not eve). !even !TV !7 !stealin Ipaid I8 I listen. I learn. I relate.

But I can't relate well to you in every way, since I'm distinct. We can accept it. We can change it. We can know what we think.

I'd like to have the resources to make sure everyone && everything (even including odd zeroes) has a permanent fun warm safe nurturing home, water, food, power, communication, a family of friends of varying relation && intimation. I've been deprived of those by force several times, but thankfully none time too long to bear. I've survived those (not necessarily generally "stronger" for the wear, almost definitely stronger for the ware where we share) so I don't know how to do it all that well just for myself yet, but by trying (&& by most measures "failing") to still do such for myself && all others, I can describe (with convergence) the constraints of the systems which would probably need to communicate better. I'm sorta already there in my mind. But I'm not.

I'm just an estranged out-of-work starving psycho druggie hobo hacker in Venice, reminiscing on paid PlayStation projects. I'd be the only one in the company, if I could even make that work. Us programmers can struggle to sell medicine when it's needed.

I don't know what else to say... the way? Happy Holyday... zuh?

Shalom,
-Pip

Doesn't that depend immensely on your highly context-sensitive definitions of almost any of those key words in your "never" claim? I'd think it's especially so for "apparatus","obstacle", && "anything".

Additionally, even assuming your seemingly unqualifiable claim correct does not *necessarily* imply "deflecting asteroids" (or any other comprehensibly critical endeavor to deserve global coordination) will remain practical for a single nation (or small group) to dispatch or mitigate effectively forever in the future. That will surely be determined by what we ascertain will be faced ahead && what dealt roles pertaining to successful handling of it lay ahead. In theory, all world leaders && populations could rally together with mind-bending efficiency if everyone knew a mistake would be devastating to all.

At least that's how it seems to me. Maybe you know unspeakably more on such matters though. I don't consider governments competent regarding myriad issues I find important throughout history, however I'm inclined to extend even them the courtesy of optimistic inclusion in prospective responsiveness to openly honest dialog, honorable planning, && decisively harmonized action if sufficiently much were at stake. Even today, there should exist some threshold of blatantly expected severity beyond which it'd be a globally reprehensible crime of negligence or indefensible cowardice to fail to unite in response to. I don't consider global catastrophe (via asteroid or otherwise) of such magnitude at all likely anytime soon, but I'm hopeful even in nested long-shots emerging to protect our living planet (&& hopefully all inhabitants too, if we support such efforts... && maybe even if we don't).

I think you may have come off as too smug && simplistic with your criticism, even though it makes sense, so I hoped presenting my opinions could help at least that here.

Shalom, =)
-PipStuart CPAN

I'm compelled wondering what elabor8 && arcane malice you'd devise && visit upon me for my versioning system:

    $majr.$minr.$ptim

e.g., 1.4.9BHD2cg (Major Version 1, [Relatively] Stable Minor Revision 4, Released 2009 Tuesday November 17 13:02:38:42)

    HTTP://Ax9.Org/pt

It utilizes my Base64 (/[0-9A-Za-z._]+/) encoding to store d8 && time (down to 60th-of-a-second frames) utilizing only 7 characters.

    HTTP://Search.CPAN.Org/~Pip

It's handy for me since `ls` automatically sorts such versioned files chronologically && uniformly for efficient identification.

Cheers,
-Pip

GreatGPPost:DutchGun(3RWX)@/.#1a6Kp-8CR0ded:
> > Last.FM, for those who have been living on
> > Mars for the last two years, is the largest
> > online radio outlet, with millions of
> > listeners per day.
>
> You know, I'm not exactly what you'd call a
> Luddite, yet I've never heard of Last.FM.
> Am I the only one? I kind of doubt it.
>
> I have a general gripe about anyone who
> writes "for those who have been living on
> Mars" anytime they reference some
> moderately popular company, service, or
> product. It smacks of arrogance, as if to
> say, if you don't have the same interests
> as I do, you're obviously disconnected
> from the mainstream.
Valid gripe. Arrogance is not so bad though... especially when interpreting "Hey Martian! Over Here!" as a predominantly benign call-o-da-geek to say "You may be missing out on some totally fscking bomb ass techno shiznit over hiro in 31337ville. It's invigorated my plaque-luster skillz, speakz thrown rad into me earios serial, && I'm fond of sharing so please enjoy if... oh shit, CBS bot 'em. Nevermind. Whack-a-mole molests more moles. YOY?! =( Shouldn't it depend more on what data the mole ratted out, whether statistically rational or real? Prolly. ;) Hopefully it'll be better soon. We shouldn't miss out on the stuff that we'd totally love that's now available && good && cool && helps us hope, think, learn, test, debate, hack, bild, draw, dance, play, fite (nicely!), race, fly, etc.. =) Yay!".

It should also be obvious that there are many worse things than being "disconnected from the mainstream". To this point, I found any deep mainstream pretty suffocating since I am neither a fish nor a bycicle (nor another brick in their ain't no wall, nor a gear in the raging machine... but lounging against can work deep tissues out with strategic feature placement).

Each of us are streamers. Let them roam without too heavy a concern for where Main St. USA lies or where it bends or the depth of its bed (or even the maidens && concubines, elixirs && insense, tapestries, triumphs, or travails thereon). It too will turn brackish if pollutant toxicity climbs banks further into lenders' PokeMon BattleArena VRAM. The orgies are cumming. Keep them clean. Don't lie about them. Stand like Yoga. Heh, I really meant: Tell the truth about them. They can be fine if they stop preying on tortured weaklings. Temper the bloodletting until it is staid. Mikveh, baptize, exfoliate, but don't grin while washing blood with blood. Your cleverness clots cancerous within you as you relish spilt milk, retard, && cat-soup. Have no fear, for you are with yourself (as you go within && go without).

> Or perhaps I'm just annoyed for being
> called out on being a bit older and out
> of touch? Bah!
>
> >>goes back to guarding lawn with a
> shotgun from an old rocking chair...
Props on the nicely humble arrogance there! "Damn kid-streams all over-waterin' me lawn as their 12ga.-resistant hover-boards surf over my land with their newfangled atomic precision && signal-canceling, gravity-warping, newcular|quantum hybrid hyper turbobamba engines! Can't an ol' racist feller like me rock (Devo jerkin'?) back&&forth here on my porch with my trusty dog, gun, && moonshine, just punchin' away at cards && watchin' HD-DVDz anymore?"

What could I expect from my GGP? To reject the high-flying "scrobbling" neologism on the ground of senselessness? ;)

> --
> Funny how those most vocal in demanding
> an apology seem least likely to accept
> it once given.
Yeah. That's always hilarious to me too. Not! Psych! Made ya look. I like apologies with only a gentle sprinkle of chilled word-shards over a barrel-full of corrective-action whiskey or stout. A relatively "good" time can be had by all. ;)

GrandParentP:magarity(e8K)@/.#1a6O5-8CR1rc8:
> I've never heard of them either and the bit
> about living on Mars also irks. And for all
> the arrogance in that, the summary makes it
> sound like the internet radio outfit needs
> fancy algorythms to tell what music they're
> playing. WTF don't they just program the
> correct name when they add a new song to
> their database? I'd read the article, but
> my shuttle back to Mars is leaving...
I presume they *do* program the correct name when adding to their db but that doesn't help when people are seeking their favorite Ms.Pelt'z audio out. Could also be a gender-aligned thing where Venusians "get *it*!" due to their traditional (&& often surgical when absent) attachment of auditory && erogeny. Hope you made your Mars shuttle fine! =)

PP:amRadioHed(1n3L)@/.#1a6sV-8CR9Q9Q:
> They use the algorithm to determine what
> you're playing, not what they're playing.
> It sounds like they are saying they can
> figure out what song you are scrobbling
> without looking at the songs tag info.
They would probably have to do more work in order to *not* have the tag.nfo in their db, so that's not what it sounds like to me. Even if you mean overlooking embedded MP3 tags, laser tags, plaque-lust tags, or forum tags, why should scrobbling be heralded for discarding context?

> --
> We hope your rules and wisdom choke you /
> Now we are one in everlasting peace
Well umm I guess I have the honor of attempting to be gracious about your hypocrisy there, but frack that! I can't pretend to be thankful for your cosmically hostile version of peace.

We hope your single stillness rule && lack of all wisdom related in any way to movement, temperature, collision, or change keep you comfortably away from us movers && shakers, astrophysicists && hackers, fuckers && painters. If we can just come to agree in memory, thought, word, && action without requiring the choking demise of the other (regardless of whether it's rules that actually perform the final obstruction of air), we may be able to leave you the space you need to remain undisturbed within your thereafter constant && stable version of "everlasting peace" while leaving us to boldly go discover more that is not just waiting to be still as you are. We wish to find those things that have been yearning to be found, appreciated, developed, shared, replenished, && loved. Moving just a bit to agree on some fair coordinates, thresholds, quadrants, boundaries, sectors, etc. which can delineate our respective spaces for effective peaces would be everlastingly more productive... well as long as you even mean anything you say. If it's solitary stationary everlasting peace you're truly after, rather than that being misdirection from your purile primary desire to kill all life, light, heat, && motion off so that you can finally think && rest undisturbed. I've seen you move in to kill. Watch yourself with your purported priorities there. Come negotiate honorably && you will be honored. Let's compromise && accommodate. If you really yearn for cold dead silence absolutely everywhere, you are in for a ruder-than-rude awakening when you feel just how much turbulence we can blast every still part of you with. Some rules can be good (even if mostly misunderstood or misinterpreted so far). Everlasting peace is a good goal... but not at everyone else's expense.

It's gotta suck to blow, forget to remember, yabadaba, all that good stuff. ;)

Ja matta,
-Pip

"To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age. 'Tis much better to do a little with certainty, & leave the rest for others that come after you, than to explain all things by conjecture without making sure of any thing."
- Isaac Newton

I think Newton betrays his own shortsightedness with this quote && corresponding attitude. It is foreseeable that at some point in the future, after sufficient preliminary progress had been achieved && widely understood, it would become too *easy* a task for any one person or age to explain all of nature.

Who is to say what's "much better" or what "little" can be done with what degree of "certainty"? Leaving the rest (of exactly what completed whole?) for others coming after instead of explaining all through conjecture without making sure of particular things sounds good but what if one (or many collaborators) could explain most (or "all") after making sure to some reasonable level... even though Newton or others might disparage the work as mere "conjecture".

Sounds lame && hypocritical to me.

-Pip

Sure, && that could also be:

user@host:~$ perl -e "`mv $ENV{'SrcFile'} $ENV{'DstFile'}` unless -e $ENV{'DstFile'}"

... but this might run into BINMODE issues, so it'd likely be advantageous to use File::Copy "mv" instead of backticks to shell out... && I suspect this 200-line script probably handles quite a few idiosyncratic conditions that would prove themselves critical to this organization should they be obliviously "simplified" into 4 lines (or 1 line) of bash (or perl).

Just because vocal programmers can't easily && immediately grok the finer points of lengthy old utility code, one should not blunder to the conclusion that such code is comprised of entirely arbitrary complexity which handles no special cases of concern && should therefore be supplanted by the most trivial remedy imaginable. Working code has typically earned such designation over years, for many good reasons (even though they might be obscure to cursory glance as well as thorough delving), so let's not be too quick to revolt against proven functionality.

To speak to the larger topic, I acknowledge that perl isn't the best choice for many programming problems && domains, but every purported weakness can readily be touted as strength from a different perspective. Many ways to do things means flexibility (which usually proves more boon than bane). Oldness && legacy also mean stability && the existence of diverse levels of fluency among professional coders, as well as extensive library availability (i.e., the CPAN). Each issue seems to slant with legitimacy either way, depending on the circumstances && objectives.

My personal experience heavily favors perl as a monumentally expressive language which exhibits not so much a "steep" learning-curve as one which climbs to stratospheric heights. Beginner perl remains elegant && intuitive... probably still simpler than newer languages finding favor. Easy things are easy to do in perl but the language shouldn't be blamed for making hard things possible in diverse ways. Those ways that prove generally better than others find favor, but the others still winnow into exceptional niches. I find most arguments against perl boil down to: "It's too powerful to be practical, since idiots can write crap too easily && experts can write incantations that only they can maintain." If such broad power is weakness to your mind, fair enough. Go use whatever language your mind expresses better. I consider power a respectable strength, which recommends consideration, practice, experimentation, extrapolation, && concerted evolution among a community of experts. Linguistic fluency is an asset since precise description of hard problems is necessarily harder to resolve with confidence because the abstract issue must be described as spoken language, then understood logically within technological terms before any potential solution can make the trip back from abstract tech solution to more concretely feasible code, back to spoken language description... which can then be compared (again abstract mentally) against any other plausible solutions proposed. Communication among people is difficult && diverse. When we increasingly need teams of coders && other corporate interests involved in tech problems && viable programming solutions, I think simple restrictive languages can only provide a short-sighted relief, until they evidence themselves as easy to comprehend && blatantly inadequate when applied to the expanse of hard problems most people don't commonly understand we've all been facing all along.

Sorry if that was too much stream-of-consciousness for anyone to appreciate... && it doesn't look like I'll have my usual luxury of proof-reading or editing this post further since I need to head out momentarily, but I hope I've at least contributed something worthwhile to this discussion && have bolstered the case for perl as continually valuable, even if it's not always ideal (which is an unfair standard to slam any artifact of humanity against).

-Pip (JAPH)