IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New artist, religious figure, politician
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
New I thought about artist
In most cases, art is static. And there is no $ risk of the art mis-performing, unless it is a giant structure, and then it is based on falling over and killing people, or an opening didn't draw enough people. Those are not internal hidden failures.

They don't fall into the level of constrained details that are required to program. No art viewer cares if the pigments are arguing with each other and 5 years from now the painting will crumble.

I could ramble on, but I simply don't accept any type of art as having the business functionality that allows for the type of hidden damage programmers create. And it doesn't even create it's own reality, it creates an impression on the person experiencing it. When that person walks away, the art effectively doesn't exist in their world other than the thoughts left behind. But a program is acting independently of user, they merely intersect occasionally.

Both religious figures and politicians depend on convincing others of their realities before they can exist. And no matter how well they convince, they just changed other people's behavior, for a while. If they convinced them to do something because the angels said so, they lied. Programmers create the angels.

Programmers directly alter the behavior of independent agents, and can control (not that they always do, but CAN control) every single thing the programs does. And the program will continue to affect real world events, at least as long as the admins keep the systems running. As per the programmer's spec.

Hmm. Ok, so while the freedom gives the initial ability to create these worlds, as long as there is hardware involved the admins are necessary. You can be one of my angels, box. Don't forget, angels are interchangeable. Eventually.

Back to religious figures and politicians: With the exception of dictator, and I mean way past Saddam level, they can't control individual actions, they can merely guide. And people are stupid. They can be convinced of almost anything, using many levels of language, which is used in a way to confuse them, not clarify. Whatever comes out of the process is subject to debate.

Computers are the opposite. You have to exactly specify what it does. Programmers (of the level I'm describing) create multiple realities, on their own, until the reality they create matches the desired goals of the customer. Nothing like religious figures and politicians.
Expand Edited by crazy Sept. 27, 2010, 12:13:54 PM EDT
Expand Edited by crazy Sept. 27, 2010, 12:15:19 PM EDT
Expand Edited by crazy Sept. 27, 2010, 01:48:53 PM EDT
New Economists
--

Drew
New If I got to invent my reality
I'd have tons more money :-)
Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
New So basically the answer is no one?
New Judges
They can create any virtual reality they like and you get to live in it.
New Judges win on straight power
No question.

But they have intense review of their processes.

They have to pretend to follow the law, but let's face it, we've seen some tortured logic to allow their viewpoint to drive a judgment.

The intense review can take a very long time, though, and the power to enforce bad decisions is immense. So they do create reality.

So as long as they cover their bases to not be impeached, and are elected for life, yeah, those few win 100%.

They are not creating a product that satisfies a client, though, so no, they aren't what I had in mind, (at least as a reasonable comparison to what I do), so I won't be using them as an example. I don't pretend that level of power.
New engineers
Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
New Somewhat
They are licensed, have specific educational requirements, and are subject to legal issues when their designs fail. In almost all cases, their work is reviewed by at least 1 other person, if not dozens. They rarely are the guys actually putting the stuff together (they do prototypes), and their might be production facilities and other aspects of their job, dealing with many people who can call them on their work when it doesn't look right.

And in their case, they have exact mathematical formulas to guide what they build, and catalogs of off the shelf parts (like program libraries, but the specs on those parts are far better than the specs on a 3rd party library), and someone else can say if their design won't hold up based on weight or other factors.

Nope. Yes, conceptually they start out near, but they veer off. I can assume that a licensed experienced engineer can take on a particular type of project, and if he screws it up, it's going to cost him a lot. He does not have the freedom to invent the way a programmer does, he has real world constraints. Programmers can have whatever they can envision, and if envisioned right, the only constraint is the cost of the next server when scaling, which is trivial and pays for itself when needed.

I didn't say greatly affects their reality. I said invents.
New Programmers have real world constraints
Processor budgets, memory budgets, etc.

Try building a huge dynamic Javascript front-end without controlling the client machine and you'll see what I mean.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New Sometimes
As I pointed out above, not all programs or programmers have the freedom I am describing, but some do, some of the time. And a few have it almost all the time. If I walk into a job and they ask me to write a program that performs a task, if the compute power isn't available then it will have to be paid for, in support of my decision process.

That will go through some type of review, but what other individual can say that my particular design is wrong, won't work, and be able to prove it beforehand? Good luck on that. They brought be in specifically because I know how to do that type of stuff, and they don't.

And once I have my baseline environment, I'm in charge of all aspects. The subset of systems I work on don't include any browser specific code, and we have as little front end java script as possible.

In my world, if a new server is required, it is in support of a specific revenue stream, so the cost is not a constraint. We love to buy more equipment to make more money. Your real world constraints are not my real world constraints, and constraints vary project by project.

Not do all programmers have the freedom I'm describing. Some do, occasionally.

So the question is: Does anyone else?

And if not, is there any other that is even close, at least for analogy purposes?
Expand Edited by crazy Sept. 27, 2010, 12:35:40 PM EDT
Expand Edited by crazy Sept. 27, 2010, 12:36:51 PM EDT
     What profession invents their reality? - (crazy) - (31)
         artist, religious figure, politician -NT - (boxley) - (10)
             I thought about artist - (crazy) - (5)
                 Economists -NT - (drook) - (4)
                     If I got to invent my reality - (beepster)
                     So basically the answer is no one? -NT - (crazy) - (2)
                         Judges - (scoenye) - (1)
                             Judges win on straight power - (crazy)
             engineers -NT - (beepster) - (3)
                 Somewhat - (crazy) - (2)
                     Programmers have real world constraints - (malraux) - (1)
                         Sometimes - (crazy)
         BTW, I've been doing some gardening - (crazy)
         All creative work does to some degree - (jay) - (3)
             You pretty much covered it - (crazy) - (2)
                 Re: You pretty much covered it - (jay) - (1)
                     Specialty divison doesn't work the same in programming - (crazy)
         Non-programmer responds. - (Ashton) - (3)
             You've read far more into that than I was thinking - (crazy) - (2)
                 Fair enough.. even agree: - (Ashton) - (1)
                     100% - (crazy)
         How I became a tech writer - (mhuber) - (10)
             I know you didn't mean it but - (Silverlock) - (3)
                 Not sure I follow - (mhuber) - (2)
                     Check the word before "mental health facility". :-D -NT - (Another Scott) - (1)
                         DOH! - (mhuber)
             Yeah, it's a balance - (crazy) - (5)
                 That may be the most lucid explanation yet seen re. - (Ashton) - (4)
                     mine sweepers, howsabout aircraft carriers? -NT - (boxley)
                     oh, I meant it - (crazy) - (2)
                         ..Waiting for other shoe to drop - (Ashton) - (1)
                             I saw corp presentations a couple of days ago - (crazy)

Ya got trouble, folks!
180 ms