|
He has a very valid point, but I doubt the value of such an oath - as long as the paycheck is big enough, I guess almost everybody will just deliver. Look at the people who implemented high frequency trading. Look at the ones who implemented remote control for drones that kill people on the other side of the world. (I really do despise them.)
But, yeah, either they honestly don't know what they're doing - cannot grasp the consequences of their solutions -, they know it but are careless, or the money must be too good. An oath doesn't help in any case. Not in this economy, not in this society.
And look at the Hippocratic oath for what it's worth - it didn't prevent doctors from performing medical experiments on innocent people during WWII, for example. Ethical behavior doesn't require an oath, only sanity, and enlightenment.
Just stop being only a tool.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know who told it, but I find it totally correct...
The biggest problem nowadays is that mankind is increasing its knowledge before it increases its wisdom and its ethic.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nowadays? 
|
|
|
|
|
Nowadays = heutzutage (german) = contemporary = present era = ...
or are you being just a bit sarcastic and saying that this is not only "nowadays" but always?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
The latter. 
I'm not just sarcastic, I'm also a cynic.
|
|
|
|
|
I must compile my code true. I must compile it better than the warning that is trying to stop me. I must compile it before it segfaults me. I will...
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
"When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page." -- Mike Hankey
"just eat it, eat it"."They're out to mold, better eat while you can" -- HobbyProggy
|
|
|
|
|
Science fiction is filled with examples of robots declining the requests of their human companions. "A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law."
I'd have gone with, "I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that", but that's right there in the article.
|
|
|
|
|
This is going to end bad, I fear
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In exchange for not being sued, Jakub F. had to make a video slamming online piracy entitled “The Story of My Piracy.” In the future, we'll all have to go viral
|
|
|
|
|
Free Pascal is a 32, 64 and 16 bit professional Pascal compiler. Because Niklaus Wirth has a posse
Besides, don't you still have some code left lying around from your Turbo days (or college)?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Besides, don't you still have some code left lying around from your Turbo days (or college)?
Yes. Yes I do.
And I'd say, "and I know how to use it", except I don't. 
|
|
|
|
|
Good code reads well, best code rhymes There once was a coder named Chuck...
|
|
|
|
|
IWandered _lonely As Cloud
if (Music b<Love>(theFood)) { play.On; }
Oh this is going to make an awful mess of Monday...
|
|
|
|
|
Google Glass redux ? The Verge: [^], SlashGear: [^]
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Without altering its genomic sequence, biologists have created hybrid flatworms with heads and bodies from two different species. Good news if you're a brainless worm? (But enough about me...)
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but Creationism created worms with which science could then do that!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure there's a management joke in here somewhere 
|
|
|
|
|
That would imply more another part of the body placed lower 
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
What’s the best way to kill the productivity of a software engineering team? Imagine how productive no developers would be!
|
|
|
|
|
It turns out that if n is the number of developers on a project, the number of communications channels between them is n(n-1)/2.
And therein lies the problem with these Agile, Scrum, stand-up, whatever software development practices. Everyone has their hands in the pie. How do you reduce the number of communication channels? By not requiring everyone to communicate with everyone else. How do you do that? By having a crystal clear requirements document. Then you can (theoretically) create teams that consist of smaller teams, etc., parceling out the work based on how the components of project need to communicate with each other to satisfy the requirements. This really isn't that complicated. Decide what needs to be communicated and how.
Now the irony of this is that you are maximizing the communication of components in the application and minimizing the need for communication between developers. Fancy that.
Now, let's look at the opposite situation: Agile development. Here, all the programmers talk to each other, but have you ever seen any attention paid to compartmentalized communication between components of the application? Of course not! What you see instead is a huge OOPS: object oriented programming spaghetti.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I view Agile practices as suited to some types of projects: particularly those where requirements are not known properly in advance, or change rapidly.
The converse is that there are plenty of projects where they do not work well. These typically have hard, known requirements.
The trick is to spot the type of project and adjust your methodology to fit.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
You are right, but he too...
Even when a project change rapidly... if you have 50+ developers, the time waste of communicating with all members is bigger.
It is not a matter of "tree" structure or agile, it is a matter of common sense and middle point using the best of both cases.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Preach it, brother!
I've long observed a direct relationship between the success of a project and the quality of its requirements documents.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
