My deepest thanks go out to our veterans who did so much so that we could enjoy our freedoms and liberties. Long may their sacrifices be remembered.
My deepest thanks go out to our veterans who did so much so that we could enjoy our freedoms and liberties. Long may their sacrifices be remembered.
Some may have noticed I coded factorial and called it Fibonacci. That’s courtesy of being sick when I wrote that article. I guess being sick and lucid don’t tend to go together. I’m doing better today and I immediately noticed the mistake. Duh. That’ll teach me for coding while sick…
That’s what many people I know think of when they hear my favourite languages are all Lisp derivatives such as Scheme or Clojure. They usually follow that up with a statement indicating that there are just too many brackets in Lisp. For a while I’ve wondered about this and after a little bit of study I think most people are wrong. They’re fixated on the position of the brackets not on the number. Most languages use a lot of brackets, be they , ( … ), { … } or < … >. Anyone who codes up XML knows all too well how many of those < … > brackets they’ll be dealing with. So I looked around for some simple samples of accumulator code fragments and found this on Paul Graham’s site. Sure, Graham is a Lisp geek, but a quick look at the following C++ code quickly shows something: struct Acc { Acc(T n) : n(n) {} template <typename U> Acc(const Acc<U>& u) : n(u.n) {} template <typename U> T operator()(U i) { return n += 1; } T n; }; template <typename T> Acc<T> foo(T n) { return Acc<T>(n); } vs. Scheme which is as
If you are or want to be an entrepreneur, go read The 11 Harsh Realities of Being an Entrepreneur. Definitely worth your time!
Tom Peters gives a mini-rant on what truly drives innovation. I would definitely agree. But, to be successful, being angry about something that’s stupid is only half the battle. The other half is finding those people who similarly believe a given system is stupid and are capable of assisting in change. Otherwise, you can be angry all you want, create a great product, but if the folks with the bucks don’t agree with you you’ll get nowhere. Thus, to affect change you need to ensure others who want to live vicariously through you are also those who can affect change. It’s this very reason why I believe innovation takes so long to take off. Much of it is a fight against those who refuse change. They dislike it because change is different and different is uncomfortable. But I do agree with Tom Peters: stay angry if you want to make change. Just make friends who can help you affect that change once you’ve converted your anger into a solution.
As I sit here in excruciating pain courtesy of yet another kidney stone I can’t help but think how genetics and evolution provided me with this “joyful” condition. Which makes me think of idiotic creationists who think God went about the planet a few thousand years ago going “Horse. Pig. Donkey. …” Insanity. Why creationists believe in such an animist god is beyond me. A god who is stupider than I am is irreconcilable with either my faith or intelligence. And that’s one of those things I simply cannot figure out. Why do so many people believe in a god who is dumber than many people are? Is it the comfort that comes from believing someone created everything as it is as opposed to someone who was intelligent enough to create the fundamental algorithms of the universe that would result in the beauty we see everywhere, from the smallest of the small to the immensity of the universe itself. Is it so hard to comprehend that it is much more wonderful to believe that God created a universe based on mathematics, that behaves in comprehensible ways that we, as humans, could comprehend given time? Is it not more wonderful to
Irkonomics is something I remember reading about years ago. And now that we have a new municipal government I’m hoping that some of the stuff that irks me will get addressed. For example, the way the traffic lights are never synchronized correctly so that traffic flows herky-jerky, or not at all; the way in which certain computer programs are designed so as to make it difficult to do ordinary things; the way some TV channels opt to make shows run past their 1/2 hour or hour slot so taping them via the DVR is made more aggravating; the increasing number of pedestrians who don’t look both ways but just cross the street, usually because they’re too busy texting or bopping to their iPods; or how some bicyclists seem to have a death wish when riding about town, thinking the big metal objects hurtling down the road will stop in time (I think some of these folks have a death wish). In other words, How people are taking something that should be fairly straightforward and generally screwing it up. I have to believe that everyone is truly trying to make things better but at times I think we’ve all fallen so
Maybe it’s just me getting older, but I’ve been finding that drivers are getting worse and worse. A few simple examples will easily suffice. Today, driving around town, I was trying to get into the right hand lane. The asshole beside me would repeatedly slow down and speed up, thereby ensuring I couldn’t move over. I finally got past him but it was a frustration I don’t need. Then, driving home I was blinded at a stop light by some idiot with their high beams on. I flashed them to see if they’d take the hint. Nothing. Too oblivious to notice. This goes along with what happened the other day. While I was driving I noticed the car ahead of me had a flat tire. At the next light I pulled up beside the driver and honked to get his attention. He looked around in all directions but mine. I could tell he was trying NOT to make eye contact with me. Maybe he thought I was pissed off with something he’d done — he was driving fine except for the flat — when all I wanted to do was tell him his car had a flat. Argh. And then
During the Winter of 1998-99 I had spent time discussing the possibility of having certain people join me at Texar. I had my sights on a number of people who I had known from prior interactions and with whom I’d hoped to reconnect. One of my primary targets was Tony, who I had met at Carleton University when we both were pursuing our Master of Computer Science degrees. Tony had completed his degree before I had and continued on towards his Ph.D. Tony and I had repeatedly discussed the possibility of his joining Texar should Texar ever get funded. In early 1999 the possibility moved towards a high probability. Tony and I sat down and discussed the possibilities at my favourite restaurant, Mini-Italia in Centrepointe. Enjoying another fantastic meal prepared by Kenny, Tony and I discussed what was transpiring. He was interested but wanted to mull it over. I told him I’d keep him informed. When the deal finalized I told him the money was “imminent”. He contacted me a short while later and we discussed positions, salary, and other issues. When it was all over I had hired myself a Chief Scientist. It was now April 1999, we had
I recall reading about him in High School and then studying his work more in university and thereafter. He passed away today; his legacy will live on. Rest in Peace.