You really must grow out of help desk and learn some useful stuff...imbecile fucker. And stop pretending you understand something about computers or even know how to read English errors. You are a fucking waste of space on this planet.
That's kind of harsh to say to an AC.
A CS could prove that your well-tested program is actually broken.
When I first got a job as a video game tester, my supervisor gave me a notepad and let me play the video game that they released the year before. I found every bug that the game shipped with. Over the next six years, I would write 30,000+ bug reports and be responsible for ten titles as lead tester. I'm well familiar with well-tested code being broken because management overruled me at the code release meetings.
And a CS could show you that your well-tested program's performance won't scale in production.
A problem domain that doesn't keep me up at night because I'm just a coder and not a professional programmer.
You accidentally a few words.
According to https://grammar.com/ my usage of "than" was called into question.
I can think through a coding problem well enough, as well as or better than most programmers I know.
According to https://readable.io/ your sentence has too many adverbs ("well" flagged twice). It also reads like an English major writing out of his ass.
Funny how the guy claiming he's really great at thinking through things can't catch obvious errors in his own writing.
Perfect grammar isn't a requirement for thinking through problems. My obvious error is the usage of "than" (comparison) rather "then" (time). A common mistake that I make because it's related to my learning disability of being unable to distinguish similar sounding words (i.e., than/then, glass/grass or ear/year) due to a hearing loss in one ear. Than/then was a particular challenge until a college instructor explained the differences.
Thank you. This is what I sarcastically asked for. Of course climate ACG is real, except to Trump supporters.
You're not a programmer, right?
Not professionally. I work in IT Support.
Spending double on a new computer will not cause your program to finish in half the time if it's waiting on a poorly constructed network request.
Those days are long over. I switched out my quad-core processor for an eight-core processor. Performance overall didn't improved that much because most of my applications are single core.
Until they can show peer reviewed research showing climate change, I'm not believing it.
It's a Chinese hoax.
IT guy! My mail is crashing! It says assertion failed! Fix it with your coding skills! Quickly! IT guy stop surfing donkey porn and fix the code now! I need my mail!
Sorry. I work in InfoSec, not Help Desk. Call 1-800-IBM-HELP.
[...] looks a little more complicated [...]
A different programmer looks at it a year later, determines that it looks too complicated, and refactors the code to be more simpler "in a far more elegant, better scaling and maintainable solution."
Umm no and here's the rebuttal: http://backreaction.blogspot.c...
To tell the truth, I think that the "Universe is a simulation" is just the latest creationist effort. In a simulation, dinosaurs can be put in the ground just for fun, bioogical relations are just that way because the great simulator in the sky wants them that way, and the apparent age of the universe, speed of light, and radioactivity are all 100 percent arbitrary.
So if the universe is a simulation, there is no reason why the Abrahamic God didn't create it in October 4004 b.c.e. as determined by Usher so it is now science, and must be taught in the nation's classrooms. The Bible is now the scientific description of a scientific simulation program.
Solved everything and did the final endrun around those supreme court athiests. Howbow dah?
It isn't even a theory though, as there isn't anything to support it.
There is no conclusive proof, but there is plenty of evidence that the universe is a simulation. In many ways, the universe appears to be designed to be easy to simulate. If you were designing a universe simulation, what would you do?
1. Due to limited computational resources, the simulated universe would be granular or "quantum". 2. To limit computation, reality would be held in a fuzzy probabilistic "superposition" state until it is actually observed, similar to how a GPU running OpenGL will skip the generation of hidden polygons. 3. The maximum speed of information transfer would be finite, to limit the propagation of changes through the universe.
All of these are actually true in our universe, ergo, we are very likely a simulation.
I have it even better using the same logic. God made us - let's say the Abrahamic God. We are here, which is completey consistent with God making us, therefore - proven that God made us.
God's running the simulation, and that's all anyone needs to know. It all depends one's ability to give up and stop thinking, because if we live in a simulation, there is no point in studying anything, because at any moment, the great simulator in the sky can turn off the computer, and make a different simulation.
Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.