Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 20:42, Jon maddog Hall wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Sometimes it's like having your entrails ripped out with a rusty pitchfork and ground into the mud by a herd of stampeding llamas with mad cow disease. Let's see. Let's take about several billions lines of code, written by several thousand people (and that is a conservative estimate), most of who never communicated with each other in any way, and most of whom never read the documentation (if it existed) all the way through, (or even started reading it). And they definitely, definitely never read the erata sheets or manditory update information. ... (wonderful description of reality gracefully skipped)... Finally, even when the systems don't work, and continuously fail, we do not throw them out. If other systems fail, we throw them out. But with computers we keep trying to use them, refusing to look at other answers. And you wonder why things don't work? I am continuously amazed they work so well. Well put. It is my educated opinion that software development is becoming more and more like biological ecosystems. Use whatever works by way of Natural Selection, no matter how ugly it is. Elegance be dammed. A model of co-evolving systems would probably be surprisingly appropriate! And like real evolutionary biological systems, once you start down a certain road, there is no looking back. Once a system, no matter the ugliness, is actually working and in place, there is little incentive or hope to improve it. It's used as is, with more kludges piled on top later. Does that mean that the computer world, taken in as a whole, is a living system? Um, yep. And you should pray that this big morass we hackers and software engineers created does not ever become self-aware! ;-) -Fred ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
There are two ways of constructing a piece of software: One is to make it so simple that there are obviously no errors, and the other is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious errors. C. A. R. Hoare ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization. - Gerald Weinberg ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
Programmers are optimists and design systems accordingly.
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
On Dec 27, 2005, at 19:13, Ben Scott wrote: I'm wondering if there is a reason for this, or am I just living in the wrong quantum universe? Customers want features yesterday for free. I think that about covers it. Oh, and they have no idea how to calculate ongoing support costs. In another quantum universe we'd just put a hold on new features and fix bugs for the next five years. And everybody would be better off in the end. But unless you anticipate our superbranes colliding anytime soon you should just raise your hourly rate. The collision would probably annihilate both universes anyway. -Bill - Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440 BFC Computing, LLC Home: 603.448.1668 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell: 603.252.2606 http://www.bfccomputing.com/Page: 603.442.1833 Blog: http://blog.bfccomputing.com/ VCard: http://bfccomputing.com/vcard/bill.vcf ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
Ben Scott wrote: [WARNING: Now entering a low-reality zone] I'm just wondering if anyone knows of any work done to develop a Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage? It's just that I'm once again noticing that pretty much everything, everywhere, that has anything to do with a computer, sucks. The suckage varies. Sometimes it's like a distant high-frequency sound that you almost, but not quite, can't hear. Sometimes it's like having your entrails ripped out with a rusty pitchfork and ground into the mud by a herd of stampeding llamas with mad cow disease. But it's pretty much always there. I'm wondering if there is a reason for this, or am I just living in the wrong quantum universe? -- Ben Llama herder Scott Uh... Having a bad day? LOL :-D I can feel your pain. Well, actually, if I felt your pain, I'd be in shock or unconscious or dead. Stampeding diseased llamas... Rusty pitchfork... Ye gods! After working for closing on thirty years doing tech support (amongst other computer stuff), I feel I can safely say, yes, it sucks; no, it hasn't really gotten better; and I doubt it'll greatly improve any time soon. Which is why I'm still working on tech support after thirty years... with no end in sight. Not that it's done me any harm. (I wonder why my business partner laughs so hard when I say that.) I do believe it does have something to do with the ineluctable nature of the universe, as Finagle's Law states: The perversity of the universe tends toward a maximum. The corollary of Hanlon's Razor does accerbate that native perversity. As Frank Zappa observed, There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life. Combine perversity and stupidity and what do you get? Have a nice day, Ben. (Or, at least, a better one.) ;-) -- Dan Jenkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Rastech Inc., Bedford, NH, USA --- 1-603-206-9951 *** Technical Support Excellence for over a quarter century ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
Re: [OT] Grand Unified Theory of Computer Suckage (fnord)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Sometimes it's like having your entrails ripped out with a rusty pitchfork and ground into the mud by a herd of stampeding llamas with mad cow disease. Let's see. Let's take about several billions lines of code, written by several thousand people (and that is a conservative estimate), most of who never communicated with each other in any way, and most of whom never read the documentation (if it existed) all the way through, (or even started reading it). And they definitely, definitely never read the erata sheets or manditory update information. Then take those lines of code, which follow some standards (some written and formal, some pseudo-standard) and put them through these things called compilers and interpreters, written by other people who never talk to anyone other than their so-called peers, which generate instructions to lots of computer chips that struggle to be the same, but continually different. These lines of code are divided into things called operating systems, networking code, etc. that are supposed to work together, but still be separate stacks, for portability. All are developed by companies that want their products to be a little different so they can differentiate themselves from each other, but yet enough alike so ISVs will (reluctantly) port to them (with just a FEW ifdefs). Now let's administer them with professionals who work like the devil so their clueless bosses can do as much with as little investment as possible in infrastructure (including paying for training for the systems administrators) so the stockholders and management can buy more Porches. Finally, even when the systems don't work, and continuously fail, we do not throw them out. If other systems fail, we throw them out. But with computers we keep trying to use them, refusing to look at other answers. And you wonder why things don't work? I am continuously amazed they work so well. md -- Jon maddog Hall Executive Director Linux International(R) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 80 Amherst St. Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A. WWW: http://www.li.org Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries. (R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis (R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other countries. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
