atx42

On the other hand, I find most frameworks don't allow for DRY. The typical case is making a 40 char DB field, and then having to code a check in the payload to ensure field is 40 chars. I've wondered if any system has achieved such enlightenment.

I'm similar, I find (instrumental) Jazz works, although it's generally not my first choice of genre.

I'll claim the only universal truth in programming as in anything is: "moderation", and it's corollary, "there is no silver bullet". They are all rules of thumb, and knowing when to apply them is the most important aspect of rules.

In this case, unit tests are a very reasonable place to "repeat yourself", so you don't have to figure out what it's actually doing. Seeing the code all in place makes life easier.

If you've read the book, the movie is a supreme disappointment. Such good stuff in the book that disappears in the movie.

I don't think they did real world testing on the "improved" ones. I'd say it's obvious the number thirty could use a degree sign after it, but making it smaller and putting a box around it instead of in water, makes zero sense to me.

My take is we were asking the wrong questions, and now we know that, so hopefully we can figure out the right questions.

Always upvote articles that imply Agile can be lacking. Really, meta-processes are the way to go, and can be defined by checklists. E.g. For this effort, will documentation be helpful? check yes/no. Then you aren't blindly just doing stuff because it is or is not part of the process. The process itself is configurable.

I'd think the Keystone pipeline would have been the lesser of the two evils.

Don't worry, they will just ask their next interview candidate and then they'll have the solution.

It means they just need to solve the "halting problem" first and then transactions can get back to normal.

Replace "consciousness" with "gobbledygook". Does it exist? Can you get closer to it? Can't apply science to it.

I think you are saying we have a rough idea what it means, but then it's a sliding scale as far as ability to get closer to it.

I think consciousness probably requires pleasure/pain, and no, just setting negative/positive values in training does not mean pleasure/pain is involved.

The best a neural network could is pretend it is conscious (I'd have no trouble turning it off). Would artificial consciousness be useful outside of some kind of companionship app (eg. replace my dog)?

My quick take on "gifted" programs. * These are really supposed to be for kids that learn differently, not necessarily "smarter". * The percentage of kids in these programs is higher than should be expected. * The number of kids that happen to have teacher parents or some possible inside track seems high.

I think people hear "gifted" and think they are being left out, but that's not supposed to be the case. Sort of the difference between classroom and home school, sometimes one works better for a kid than the other, not that one is necessarily better than the other.

Interesting. I guess it gets back to "first cause" argument. If life is organizational, does it require an organized process to form.

Isn't metaphysics the only thing we have to figure out how we got here? Provable or not? Even science agrees that there are true statements that are not provable.

Wouldn't the Big Bang represent a much higher level of entropy than now?