Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question. - Functional

This is a discussion on Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question. - Functional ; A moron Tamas K Papp wrote: > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:20:34 +0200, Rainer Joswig wrote: > > I read one of those. The guy was arguing that PI was a rational number. > > He explained that there ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59

Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.

  1. Default Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.

    A moron Tamas K Papp wrote:
    > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:20:34 +0200, Rainer Joswig wrote:
    > > I read one of those. The guy was arguing that PI was a rational number.
    > > He explained that there was some conspiracy going on so that this truth
    > > is not revealed to the public. He spend lots of time to create fancy
    > > drawings - probably the paper was typeset with something like TeX -
    > > which at that time was not that widely available.

    >
    > I have a friend who is a mathematician at a major US university.
    > Apparently their Math department gets quite a bit of mail from crackpots
    > who claim similar things. Some even come to the building and put up
    > fliers (!).


    For you ignorant lisp morons out there, on the issues of math
    crackpots , see:

    Printed References On Plane Curves
    http://xahlee.org/SpecialPlaneCurves...eferences.html

    Quote:
    «
    Title:The Trisectors (amazon.com↗)
    Author: Underwood Dudley↗
    Publisher: Mathematical Association of America
    Date: 1994-12
    Comment: Exposition of the many angle-trisectors in history. This is a
    very well written fascinating book. The author takes us thru the many
    trisetors that he personally had been contacted or visited. He tells
    us who they are, what they do, and what kind of ilk are they, if any.
    One'd be surprised the numerousness of them besiege unisersities's
    math department, even today.

    It is interesting to note, that I myself have actually been contacted
    by a angle-trisector in 2001, and asked by him to do some illustration
    for him. The person actually hoped that I could help him broadcast his
    “great discovery”. I tried to convince him that it is not possible,
    and during the first meeting, realized that this persuasion is
    impossible. It is with this incident when I found this book by
    Underwood, and in fact, this trisector in particular is accounted in
    the book. I contacted Underwood and confirmed the identity. (I did, in
    fact, actually agreed to do drawing for the trisector and got paid for
    it)
    »

    See also:

    The Condition of Industrial Programers
    http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/w...rogramers.html

    plain text version follows:

    -------------------------------

    Xah Lee, 2006-05

    Before i stepped into the computing industry, my first industrial
    programing experience was at Wolfram Research Inc as a intern in 1995.
    (Wolfram Research is famously known for their highly successful
    flagship product Mathematica) I thought, that the programers at
    Wolfram are the world's top mathematicians, gathered together to
    research and decide and write a extremely advanced technology. But i
    realized it is not so. Not at all. In fact, we might say it's just a
    bunch of Ph Ds (or equivalent experience). The people there, are not
    unlike average white-collar Joes. Each working individually. And,
    fights and bouts of arguments between co-workers are not uncommon.
    Sometimes downright ugly in emails. Almost nothing is as i naively
    imagined, as if some world's top mathematicians are gathered together
    there, daily to confer and solve the world's top problems as in some
    top secret government agency depicted in movies.

    Well, that was my introduction to the industry. The bulk of my
    surprise is due to my naiveness and inexperience of the industry, of
    any industry, as i was just a intern and this is my first experience
    seeing how the real world works.

    After Wolfram, after a couple of years i went into the web programing
    industry in 1998, using unix, Perl, Apache, Java, database
    technologies, in the center of world's software technology the Silicon
    Valley. My evaluation of industrial programers and how software are
    written is a precipitous fall from my observations at Wolfram. In the
    so-called Info Tech industry, the vast majority of programers are
    poorly qualified. I learned this from my colleagues, and in dealing
    with programers from other companies, service providers, data centers,
    sys admins, API gateways, and duties of field tutoring. I didn't think
    i have very qualified expertise in what i do, but the reality i
    realized is that most are far lesser than me, and that is the common
    situation. That they have no understanding of basic mathematics such
    as trigonometry or calculus. Most have no interest in math whatsoever,
    and would be hard pressed for them to explain what is a “algorithm”.

    I have always thought, that programing X software of field Y usually
    means that the programers are thoroughly fluent in languages,
    protocols, tools of X, and also being a top expert in field of Y. But
    to my great surprise, the fact is that that is almost never the case.
    In fact, most of the time the programers simply just had to learn a
    language, protocol, software tool, right at the moment as he is trying
    to implement a software for a field he never had experience in. I
    myself had to do jobs half of the time i've never done before.
    Constantly I'm learning new languages, protocols, systems, tools,
    APIs, other rising practices and technologies, reading semi-written or
    delve into non-existent docs. It is the norm in the IT industry, that
    most products are really produces of learning experiences. Extremely
    hurried grasping of new technologies in competition with deadlines.
    There is in fact little actual learning going on, as there are immense
    pressure to simply “get it to (demonstrably) work” and shipit.

    Thinking back, in fact the Wolfram people are the most knowledgeable
    and inquisitive people i've met as colleagues, by far.

    What prompted me to write this essay is after reading the essay Teach
    Yourself Programming in Ten Years by Peter Norvig, 2001, at
    http://www.norvig.com/21-days.html. In which, the LISP dignitary Peter
    Norvig derides the widely popular computing books in the name of
    Teaching Yourself X In (Fast) Days. Although i agree with his
    sentiment that a language or technology takes time to master and use
    well, that these books form somewhat of a damaging fad and subtly
    multiply ignorance, but he fails to address the main point, that is:
    the cause of the popularity of such books, and how to remedy the
    situation.

    When you work in the industry, and are given a responsibility of
    coding in some new language the company decided to use, or emerging
    protocol (such as voice-chat protocols or cellphone internet), or your
    engineering group adopted a new team coding/reviewing process, you are
    not going to tell you boss “nah, i want to do a good job so i'll study
    the issue a few months before i contribute”. Chances are, you are
    going to run out and buy a copy of “XYZ in 7 days”, and complete the
    job in a way satisfactorily to your company, as well feeling proud of
    your abilities in acquiring new material.

    To see this in a different context, suppose you need to pass a
    important Math XYZ exam or review in your career or get a certificate,
    but you don't remember your Math XYZ. You will likely, run out and get
    a “Math XYZ for Dummies”. Chances are, the book will indeedhelp you,
    and you will pass your exam or interview, and actually have learned
    something about XYZ, but never looked at Math XYZ squarely again.

    These books are the bedrock of the industry. It is not because people
    are impatient, or that they wish to hurry, but rather, it is the
    condition of the IT industry, in the same way modern society drives
    people to live certain life styles. No amount of patience or
    proselytization can right this, except that we change the industry's
    practice of quickly churning out bug-ridden software products to beat
    competitors. Companies do that due to market forces, and the market
    forces is a result of how people and organizations actually choose to
    purchase software. In my opinion, a solution to this is by installing
    the concept of responsible licenses. Please see this essay Responsible
    Software Licensing and spread the word, at
    http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/w...e_license.html .

    -----------------------------------

    The reason, that many of the lispers here, are quite opaque to lisp's
    problems despite repeated complaints from users for decades and
    detailed expositions, can be compared to the numerous fanatics in
    various sectors in society, from Mac fanatics to Christian fanatics to
    flat earthers. It is interesting, that often the psychology of
    behavior of human animals override rationality. This i think has
    evolution psychology basis, i.e. such behavior are actually beneficial
    to such people under the circumstances for at least short duration.

    Xah
    http://xahlee.org/



  2. Default Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.

    On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 03:41:54 -0700 (PDT), "xahlee@gmail.com"
    <xahlee@gmail.com> wrote:

    >Extremely
    >hurried grasping of new technologies in competition with deadlines.


    Actually, I've been personally acquainted with this problem and what
    it entails, having worked for a short time as a liaison ("Project
    Manager") between Japanese marketing personnel in Japan who didn't
    speak English and Bangladesh PHP programmers in Bangladesh who spoke
    very poor English.

    One Bangladesh programmer who happened to be working locally in that
    same office in Japan, when hearing of the problem of lack of learning
    of new technologies, said that he thought that one solution was to
    have programmers work in pairs, with one senior, experienced
    programmer acting as a mentor to a junior programmer.

    The problem with this approach is that it doesn't help much in
    learning pioneer technologies; it only helps with technologies in
    which the senior programmer already has some experience/knowledge.

    To my astonishment, I once read somewhere that the average number of
    programming language theory research papers that the average
    programmer reads in a month is zero. At first, I couldn't believe
    this. But having worked as a liaison between programmers and
    marketing staff, I think it is quite true.

    Most of the programmers whom I worked with were not interested in
    programming theory, or even in programming per se, and spent most of
    their free time in the office watching giant centipedes eating mice on
    YouTube, chatting in Yahoo! Messenger, or sending e-mail. Once, I
    tried discussing the Towers of Hanoi problem with one of them, and he
    replied that it was "a very hard problem" in programming. I couldn't
    believe this. Towers of Hanoi is a first-year student problem for
    computer science students!

    The problem seems to be one of lack of time and lack of interest. Most
    programmers seem to be force-fed programming technologies that they
    are not interested in, in a manner in which they are not allowed to
    explore what is interesting about the topic. Therefore, they learn to
    hate the topic, and proceed to spend all their free time trying to
    forget about programming.

    Curiosity is essential to learning, yet the environment does
    everything it can to quash any potential curiosity. No wonder there
    is no learning!

    -- Benjamin L. Russell

  3. Default Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.

    On 3 set, 04:30, Benjamin L. Russell <DekuDekup...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
    > Most of the programmers whom I worked with were not interested in
    > programming theory, or even in programming per se, and spent most of
    > their free time in the office watching giant centipedes eating mice on
    > YouTube, chatting in Yahoo! Messenger, or sending e-mail.


    Or reading newsgroups, if they are old-timers...

    > Once, I
    > tried discussing the Towers of Hanoi problem with one of them, and he
    > replied that it was "a very hard problem" in programming. I couldn't
    > believe this. Towers of Hanoi is a first-year student problem for
    > computer science students!


    That's the typical everyday joe. Most people I know from IT only
    really know SQL as a programming language. And that is just to fetch
    their precious user data in order to feed them to business rules
    processors. Why should they give any thought to interesting new
    problems so far fetched from their everyday domain? They just let
    others write creative tools for them and are happy to just be the
    middlemen between tools and users.

    > Therefore, they learn to
    > hate the topic, and proceed to spend all their free time trying to
    > forget about programming.


    Yes, but lack of curiosity and no desire to learn is all their fault
    really. Most people are cattle and just enjoy eating grass, if there
    is any. If there isn't any, they just die.

  4. Default Traitor? Mole? The hounds are ready...


    define-symbol-macro?

    What the hell is that?

    s/b defsymmacro, I smell a Schemer.

    kenny

  5. Default Re: Traitor? Mole? The hounds are ready...

    P Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:25:06 +0200, skrev Kenny <kentilton@gmail.com>:

    > define-symbol-macro?
    >
    > What the hell is that?
    >
    > s/b defsymmacro, I smell a Schemer.
    >


    Same as define-condition, a Pitman name (He prefers whole words
    remember)

    It associates a symbol with a form which is verbatimly substituted in for
    the symbol.

    It was introduced to Lisp to support with-slots and with-accessors.
    As such it is rarely called directly, but sometimes used in macros.

    --------------
    John Thingstad

  6. Default Re: Traitor? Mole? The hounds are ready...

    On Sep 4, 12:25am, Kenny <kentil...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > define-symbol-macro?
    >
    > What the hell is that?
    >
    > s/b defsymmacro, I smell a Schemer.
    >
    > kenny


    Brought to you by the Lispers who don't want to remove the fun from
    their functions, the letter Qute, and the number 2.

  7. Default Re: Traitor? Mole? The hounds are ready...

    On Sep 4, 12:25am, Kenny <kentil...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > define-symbol-macro?
    >
    > What the hell is that?
    >
    > s/b defsymmacro, I smell a Schemer.


    (def symbol-macro kenny ...)

    if you sue DEFINER

    Cheers
    --
    Marco


  8. Default Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.



    namekuseijin wrote:
    > On 3 set, 04:30, Benjamin L. Russell <DekuDekup...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
    > > Most of the programmers whom I worked with were not interested in
    > > programming theory, or even in programming per se, and spent most of
    > > their free time in the office watching giant centipedes eating mice on
    > > YouTube, chatting in Yahoo! Messenger, or sending e-mail.

    >
    > Or reading newsgroups, if they are old-timers...
    >
    > > Once, I
    > > tried discussing the Towers of Hanoi problem with one of them, and he
    > > replied that it was "a very hard problem" in programming. I couldn't
    > > believe this. Towers of Hanoi is a first-year student problem for
    > > computer science students!

    >
    > That's the typical everyday joe. Most people I know from IT only
    > really know SQL as a programming language. And that is just to fetch
    > their precious user data in order to feed them to business rules
    > processors. Why should they give any thought to interesting new
    > problems so far fetched from their everyday domain? They just let
    > others write creative tools for them and are happy to just be the
    > middlemen between tools and users.
    >
    > > Therefore, they learn to
    > > hate the topic, and proceed to spend all their free time trying to
    > > forget about programming.

    >
    > Yes, but lack of curiosity and no desire to learn is all their fault
    > really. Most people are cattle and just enjoy eating grass, if there
    > is any. If there isn't any, they just die.

    Most coders took programming as a job, something you do for money so
    could spend them on things that you need and things that interests
    you. If there was another job requring same effort and payed more they
    would be doing that instead. Why would somebody be reading about tower
    of hanoi when there is a good game on TV? If they need something to
    advance their career so they could make more money so they could buy
    bigger tv they will learn, it doesn't matter to them. It's the people
    who see programming as more than work who are complaining.
    Just imagine there is enormous demand for violin players, it pays good
    and you can find a job easily. So if you aren't 100% tone deaf you
    might say : I can't find programming job at least not one that pays
    well, so here's a good career choice for me,in the end everybody has
    to earn their bread somehow. So you go to learn violin playing in 24
    lessons course, buy violin for dummies book and got a job. You're
    doing your job and got payed, than somebody comes asking you do play
    Nicolo Paganini Fifth Caprice. Shit man we only do pop music, what the
    hell do you need those kind of crup? So continue playing vanilla pop
    at work and program at home why the bozo practices Fifth Caprice.

    bobi

  9. Default Re: Traitor? Mole? The hounds are ready...

    Kenny <kentilton@gmail.com> wrote:
    +---------------
    | define-symbol-macro?
    | What the hell is that?
    | s/b defsymmacro, I smell a Schemer.
    +---------------

    Indeed! See <http://rpw3.org/hacks/lisp/deflex.lisp>
    for how a *former* Schemer uses DEFINE-SYMBOL-MACRO
    to make life in a CL REPL a little more comfortable
    (or a little more like Scheme, your choice). ;-} ;-}


    -Rob

    -----
    Rob Warnock <rpw3@rpw3.org>
    627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
    San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607


  10. Default Re: Job Market for Lisp and Haskell programmers, serious question.

    On 4 set, 06:10, Slobodan Blazeski <slobodan.blaze...@gmail.com>
    wrote:
    > Shit man we only do pop music, what the
    > hell do you need those kind of crup? So continue playing vanilla pop
    > at work and program at home why the bozo practices Fifth Caprice.


    Yep. Shame there's an audience for well-crafted, ingenious music even
    outside musicians themselves but not an audience for well-crafted,
    ingenious code outside a few literate programmers, let alone users of
    software made out of such code. Programmers work at the
    backstage... :P

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast