Software engineering is not necessarily shallow in any sense. Reasoning about large and imperfect systems can be so much harder than finding average publishable CS results. But the difficulties are often so particular to the software and situations that it isn't of interest to academics.
> Software engineering is not necessarily shallow in any sense.
I should have been clearer in my writing. What i meant to say is that the math involved in pure software engineering is much more shallow than the math involved in pure computer science.
> Reasoning about large and imperfect systems can be so much harder than finding average publishable CS results.
Ah so you are an academic. I have been in both places. Industry people have to not only think of ideas but implement them with real computers. In some cases the computers must be built specifically to solve the problems. Millions of lines of code, broken shit, backward compatibility, stuff that can only be found through years of use. I suppose one can try to make an academic problem out of any industry concern, and therefore appear to be "more sophisticated" but inferior, partial, and broken proposals are regularly published. To get published, even a sketch of a possible solution with no implementation often flies. In industry, a lot of inferior stuff is accepted out of necessity, but it's often do or die with deadlines and real budgets to be concerned about.
I'm not saying it's math-heavy, but it's not necessarily simple. Also, just because something has math, doesn't mean it's more complicated than everything else.
You’re allowed to aid; but you refuse to believe a nation is allowed to say “not here”.
If your aim is to help, then the elected government has said find a different way so what’s your next move?
As a lifelong Democrat, I’m forced to conclude this appeal from a certain segment of hardline liberals isn’t in good faith.
You may not like it and it’s shitty, but Hamas’ attack last year changed things for me; and I’m guessing I’m not the only silent centrist who thinks this.
Every lie of omission by extremist liberals deepens my suspicions.
A nation can say "not here" to suffering people in need of medical aid, driven by a self described "proud Islamophobe". I personally think that is monstrous.
I think there's a power dynamic that it seems like you are ignoring, that big companies take advantage of. Amazon gets cheap goods to your doorstep, and removes all competition while doing it. You think those goods are going to stay cheap,i don't. This is a playbook that wallmarts followed for years. Amazon also gets sellers, by selling amazon versions of their products. Google makes billions by showing you ads, they got you there with free services, but now they enshittify.
>There's an air of let's go back to the good old days when we were hunter gatherers to the whole thing
I think my concern is not going back to the bad old gilded age days, where wealth inequality lead to most humans having a terrible life while a few had a great life.
Even if you had managed to come up with a point by selectively quoting the post, that would still be bad. The good-faith way to engage with somebody’s post is to reply to the meaning of the overall post. It might be necessary to cut some parts out for logical flow, but that shouldn’t change the meaning of what you are replying to.
Sure, but not just by contradicting arbitrary sub-sentence snippets of text devoid of context. An attack against a supporting point should be related to the way that it supports the overall argument.
I'm a huge roger waters fan, in particular the album named after this book (not to mention huxley). I was excited to finally get to read what had inspired him. I found it dated (obviously I'd read it nearly 40 years after it was published), commentary on the evils of tv.
Can an insurance company deny claim based on your DNA? They deny claims for pre-existing condition that you hid from the, which would be the wrong thing to do on your part. They cannot deny claim based on pre existing disposition. Practically everyone is predisposed for getting cancer by merely being human, you might even have cancerous cells in your body right now, that you body will destroy in a couple of minutes.
In the west there have been environmental commitments since the at least 1990s. The governments just seem to mostly ignore those commitments. So it's pretty easy for westerners to not believe commitments made by other governments.
reply