On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Michael Arnoldus <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > So it's still not clear to me what exactly you mean by trustworthiness John > ... well it's actually not clear to me what you mean by complexity either, > but in the context of making programmers more productive, complexity should > probably be tied in with something like: > > I did not attempt to precisely define complexity using Kolmogorov or Chaitin's work. I just used it as one example and provided some application, as well as some intuitive reasoning as to how such analysis can be useful. There are many *forms* of complexity and using just one *metric* seems silly to me. My thoughts on GUIs are precisely intended to make human beings more valuable, but I would like to dissuade all of you from thinking of just software engineers. Alan is pretty fond of thinking of children, because they do not have as many preconceived notions of "what things should be like" and so it is easier to imprint them with new ideas. Adults laughed when Fulton's Folly, where he put a steamboat on the Hudson. I am personally fond of thinking of "creative people". For example, for GUIs, interaction designers and UX designers as opposed to people who write code. Personally, I think software engineers *do* do too much work, and that they should be doing *less* of what they currently do. I will also resist the idea that I need to somehow find jobs for 2 million Java programmers; after all, if you look at their job description, salary-wise, most of them should make no more than "air condition repair-person". My responsibility should only be to advancing the future, not to some programmer who thinks he can coast maintaining COBOL/VSAM applications and get a flood of great tools to help him with his fundamentally broken foundational tools. Anybody who tries to say otherwise is simply arguing about nothing I care about.
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
