GedByrne

Not necessarily. In this case the business seeks an alternative to workers such automation or simply going without.

No need to imagine. That would just be Declarative Programming going mainstream?

Its just that algorithms like the Prolog’s WAM or the reet used in rules are replaced with neural nets and the like.

Rules use the same When Then format acting on a Given fact base. Prologs Horn Clauses can easily be translated into that form.

BDD writes all tests in the format Given When Then.

It’s already here.

I want to read the follow up article where the challenge is to create a typesetted document. Bentleys criticism includes a single like Shell script invoking Latex.

Take a look at the code. He makes use of both Gotos and global variables.

See paragraphs 5 & 7.

He would have been rejected as a job applicant immediately as soon as the paragraphs were read.

Is the generator still being trained based on current comments?

If so, how long will it be before it starts generating comments that include feeding the title init itself?

This is a feature not a bug.

If one of the words is slightly wrong, then you want it to be obvious.

If the Kentucky emergency operator adds an extra s they will see that it can’t be right. With the contiguous numbering the ambulance would be close, but probably still unable to find you.

See page 23 of the patent: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docs2/pct/WO2014170646/p...

But they won’t find Musk when watching Iron Man or Avengers.

To find him in film they have to watch the Greatest Showman.

Is it possible that value can be generated without a financial transaction?

The reason is explained in the front matter: “On one level, the data is simply a part of a mundane programming book. On another, each row represents immense suffering, lives lost, and in some cases amazing redemption and acceptance. In preparing for this dataset, I was deeply moved by a number of the statements and found myself re-evaluting my position on capital punishment. I hope that as we examine the data, you too will contemplate the deeper issues at play.”

Erik may know SQL but there’s an entire generation of developers who don’t.

These developers find it easier to dip into shallow DSLs instead of learning the depths of SQL.

I’d like to defend this guy. What he is doing is testing the trust mechanism.

If he went to Google and said ‘I think the trust mechanism is broken’ Google would say: ‘We know, that’s why we are pushing to move everyone to https.’

‘That isn’t enough. The padlock on the https page gives users a false sense of security.’

‘We don’t agree with that. Where’s your data?’

Google wouldn’t have accepted this. They have pushed full HTTPS hard, and suggesting that it has a negative consequence is unacceptable to them.

His experiment has proven the problem. How else could it have been demonstrated?

Ideally this would have been a large scale study done by academics. But this guy doesn’t have those resources. Nobody is going to fund this research.

The depressing thing here is that everybody is more interested in calling this guy a jerk than dealing with the issues he has raised.

Trust on the internet is broken. This guy did it with ease. Imagine what is being done by those who want to scam millions?

But yeh, call him a jerk and then you can bury your unease beneath a big pile of outrage. It’s fine. Fine. He’s a jerk.

Exactly, the only video game Crash here in the UK was Newsfield’s magazine.

I think he is making a mistake selling this as a book. These prices just don’t work for a book.

He should be selling it as a knowledge community. Members get access to the resources, conversations, training, etc.

Add levels of membership that have to be earned through merit somehow and membership at a higher level becomes valuable on the CV.

Alexa is still struggling to understand what Album I want to listen to from my rather limited music library.

She won’t be replacing the Amazon website anytime soon.

I think this is all about establishing a new distinctive look.

The current one screams “1990” at anybody reading.

Now they need something that is distinctly IBM while gently whispering “2020” into the readers ear.

Does any of this undermine any of Cialdini's content in his 'Pre-suation' book?

Somebody needs to publish: "Clickbait articles attract attention but reduce credibility"

Agreed. The investigation was good but there are issues with the reporting.

The experiment was not 'flat' vs 'not-flat'.

It is weak-signifiers vs strong-signifiers.

They have a hypothesis that states that users will be able to accomplish their task with less effort given strong signifiers.

They tested the hypothesis with two versions of the same page: one with weak signifiers and the other with strong signifiers. Both versions were created to _test_ the hypothesis. To either confirm or disprove the hypothesis.

They measured user eye movement activity and produced heat maps.

The heat maps confirm their hypothesis. With weak signifiers the users spent more time searching for the elements they wanted.

How is this not scientific?

Like all good science the conclusion is not 'flat bad, skewmorphism good.'

No, it says whatever you are doing ensure you provide users with signifiers.

So the final result is not a false dichotomy of flat vs non-flat but a useful set of guidelines: "Early pseudo-3D GUIs and Steve-Jobs-esque skeuomorphism often produced heavy, clunky interfaces. Scaling back from those excesses is good for usability. But removing visual distinctions to produce fully flat designs with no signifiers can be an equally bad extreme."

Does genetic variation rise in response to selective pressure?

It seems to me that this is a two stage process.

1. Variation is introduced at a fairly constant rate by mutation. 2. Variation is filtered out by natural selection based on how well it fits the environment.

The shocks occur when the environment changes so that the criteria for fit change and new variations survive for the long term.

So when we look at evolution we see a rate of change driven by the rate of mutation.

When we look at the long term we see a rate of change driven by the environment.

Then why isn't the code being disallowed? Why is it being silently removed in the middle of the night through an optimization back door?

So go use rust and leave C for those who think it should.

The problem is that the language allows this code and the compiler accepts it.

If the code really does make no sense, then why not disallow it or capture it with a compiler warning?

Instead the optimizer is to silently remove the code.

Isn't it possible that the programmer knows something that the optimizer is unaware of?

It says the attack hit multiple sites simultaneously. A worker said that the ransomware came through on the computers around 2pm.

This doesn't sound like a spread by phishing or attachment.

How could such an attach be co-ordinated?

I can think of two possibilities:

1) The attack has been spreading over days or weeks with a trigger date for activation. 2) The ransomware has been distributed through the desktop update system.

Any other ideas?

'The thrust of these style guides falls back to a weird kind of masculine virility. The terms themselves—“passive” and “active”—rely heavily on received tropes of gendered norms, and for that reason alone we should be suspicious of them.'

Are gender norms really the root of all evil?

Power will corrupt in both patriarchies and matriarchies.

Meanwhile there is Berixit: Berilia decides to leave the other 3 elephants.

The same here.

I so wish that Sir Terry could be here now, helping us to make sense of what is happening with some silly little stories.

Could you give some scriptural references please?

Could he have just been getting some sneaky help with his college homework?