|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Pixies, on the other hand, are very real.
Quite true!
Once the evil pixies move in, the only cure I've found is to shut down everything electronic for a few hours, spend some time relaxing at the shooting range, then come back after they've moved along. It doesn't fix the damage they've already done, but it stops them from committing more mayhem.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
The ethics of technology and their application is an oft debated subject. What is ignored is that, without technology, these debates on ethics and morality would not even occur. While it has been cited that our social development has been lacking with regards to our technological development, it is technology, in part, that forces us to develop socially as well. The nature of this tension between an objectifying technology and the subjective issues of ethics and morality is even found in the words we use to describe technologies.
The word "device" has several meanings:
- a thing made for a particular purpose; an invention or contrivance, especially a mechanical or electrical one.
- a plan or scheme for effecting a purpose.
- a crafty scheme; trick.
- a particular word pattern, figure of speech, combination of word sounds, etc., used in a literary work to evoke a desired effect or arouse a desired reaction in the reader: rhetorical devices.
- something elaborately or fancifully designed.
Note how a term we often use when speaking of our technological gadgetry can be both "a thing made for a practical purpose" and "a crafty scheme; trick."
The word "machine" has a similar duality -- "a mechanical apparatus or contrivance", deriving from the Latin machina, again includes the concept of a "trick." The similar word "machination" means "an intrigue, plot, or scheme."
As software engineers, we employ our "craft" in the construction of computer programs, using the definition "an art, trade or occupation requiring special skill", however, the term can also mean "skill in deception and trickery."
Even the word "technology", deriving from the Greek teckhne, "was not concerned with the necessity and eternal a priori truths of the cosmos, nor with the a posteriori contingencies and exigencies of ethics and politics." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Techne) In this interpretation we see that technology lives outside the realm of truth and ethics. Further "Epistêmê is the Greek word most often translated as knowledge, while technê is translated as either craft or art." (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/episteme-techne/) Here again we have a reference to "craft."
It is an interesting thing to notice how several of our words, "device", "machine", "craft", and "technology", have a duality to them, indicating both something representing skill and purpose as well as craftiness and trickery. This duality has its parallels and expression in the complexities in determining the ethics of a technology in all its various applications.
-- Reference: In the Belly of the Beast, Technology, Nature, and the Human Prospect, Steve Talbott, 2004, ISBN: 0-9744906-1-X
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: a duality to them, indicating both something representing skill and purpose as well as craftiness and trickery
I suggest that the 'skill and purpose' connotations were supplied by the technical folks who created the words, and the 'craftiness and trickery' by the great unwashed hordes that couldn't understand what the technical folks were yammering on about.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I'd counter-suggest that the duality is inherent and independent of the knowledge divide. Why this should be so is obvious. Any labour saving device is both a good thing in that it makes some task easier and a bad thing in that it robs us of some part of our identity as an achiever of tasks; a good thing in that it increases the number of tasks that might be achieved and a bad thing in that it increase the number of tasks we are expected or required to achieve. And, of course, any technological advance leaves us open to the charge of hubris, the 'sin' most likely to lead to disaster. Progress we may call it but the inescapable fact is that it always pulls us as far backward as it does forward and for the most part there's not a damned thing you can do about that.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay,
while I agree with the simple fact that we would not have these debates without the technology, I laugh at the various meanings references.
In AI classes we studied the difficulties involved in parsing ANY natural language and discovering the meaning. My favorites were always:
Fruit flies like a banana.
Their spirits are strong, but their muscles are weak.
If a farmer has less than 5 kids, he can only kill 1 kid per year.
The first one has 2 different ways to read it, the second is variable based on what Spirit means. Without context, it could be a restaurant review (Wine and Seafood), or a statement about the troops being tired and yet willing. That last is a paraphrased old law. In this case, kid was a reference to animals, not children.
So, even over time, accepted meanings change, and one word changes everything.
Like everything else, it is not what we hear, but the meaning we apply to the words we heard... 
Interesting sermon...
|
|
|
|
|
Marc,
Very nice. Good definitions and insights.
Here's some of my thoughts:
1. Most developers/coders are not actually "software engineers". Nor do they actually "engineer" anything. They just "write" code. But would you actually fly in a plane that was "written" rather than "engineered"? This last weekend I made a note that I'm going to have to finally write a book about software engineering rather than "writing" or "coding" software because I mention it significantly in a book that that I'm currently writing. If anyone has suggestions for materials or reference books/blogs/etc on "software engineering" versus "software writing/coding" I'd like to hear them. Thanks!
2. Devices/Machines/Tools are all really what I would call "Constructs". A Construct can be a physical tool or device that extends our normal body actions (that's what all tools really do) or it can be a conceptual construct that provides a structure to knowledge/ways of looking or classifying or organizing ideas/thoughts. Software is really a tool, a construct, and a very poorly defined one at that. Ideas for "constructing" can be as simple as the creation of a struct or class instead of using a loose grouping of global variables to the development of true software engineering (which has not occurred yet). Thus, there can be devices/machines/tools of a conceptual nature also.
3. Ethics is all about actions and their results and ramifications (echoing results). Each person engages in interaction with their 3D environment here. And use tools and machines to extend and amplify those actions. Ethics/morality can only apply to individuals. Tools have no ethics or morals. While the intended action of a tool may have sinister implications (a doomsday device for example) the tool technically does not have ethics or morals although it may provide any easy avenue towards misuse by an individual(s) which would be immoral/unethical. So we should look at tools and devices as only things, sometimes with implicit intents, and focus on the people/individuals who would build and/or use them.
4. The duality you mention is interesting. I would ask, "What is the purpose of the device? It's intent? And it's vector of change that it performs?" The device/machine/tool is an Object built with intent and purpose. And it can show the intent(s) of the creator/builder as well. I think that this is the duality to which you write.
But how does this apply to software?
Perhaps viruses, malware, and Trojans are the doomsday devices of software with unethical intent. Other tools are just tools without evil intent buy may be simply misused. A hard disk format utility comes to mind. Much software is poorly written but usable. And the constant pseudo-evolution of software and software development shows an immature field (where's the engineering for example) and the inability to actually build good generic general purpose tools that can do elementary things like nicely represent (and update) data from a person to/from a database. But are you trying to say something more?
- Grant
Cary Grant Anderson
-------------------------------------------------
www.CGrantAnderson.com, www.CaryGrantAnderson.com
|
|
|
|
|
Can I get an EOF
MAn! That is a great line.
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting and provocative, Marc. Thank you.
Even after reading your mini-essay quite a few times, I remain at a loss as to your point. But, I did enjoy it.
As I read the curious references to trickery in relation to the definitions, I was reminded that there has always been, it seems, a certain mysterious quality to technology for most people. The Arthur C. Clarke quote came to mind, "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." (from memory)
I experience the same wonder and awe at seeing a great magician perform. I think it's the same thing. Objectively, the magician is executing a known, rationally explainable, physical act; so from the magician's perspective, it ISN'T magic. Since I, the audience, have no clue how it's done, to me there's mystery, and it IS magic.
How this all ties into ethics is this for me...
a) some people fear what they don't understand;
b) some people imagine the worst possible outcomes;
c) some people are moved to attempt control of everyone else's behaviour because of a) and b).
It is unethical and immoral to limit my freedom to employ and enjoy technology, just because you're frightened I MIGHT do something unethical or immoral with it.
On the other side, I have a responsibility to use technology ethically and morally - according to the codified standards of society; i.e., the laws of the land.
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
|
I got this in the mail recently.
Question: What is the truest definition of Globalization?
Answer: Princess Diana's death.
Question: How come?
Answer : An English princess with an Egyptian boyfriend crashes in a French tunnel, riding in a German car with a Dutch engine, driven by a Belgian who was drunk on Scottish whisky, (check the bottle before you change the spelling), followed closely by Italian Paparazzi, on Japanese motorcycles, treated by an American doctor, using Brazilian medicines.
This is sent to you by a Sri Lankan, using the American Bill Gates' technology, and you're probably reading this on your computer, that uses Taiwanese chips, and a Korean monitor, assembled by Bangladeshi workers in a Singapore plant, transported by Indian truck drivers, hijacked by Indonesians, unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen, and trucked to you by Mexican illegals.....
That, my friends, is Globalization !
|
|
|
|
|
Vivic wrote: This is sent to you by a Sri Lankan, using the American Bill Gates' technology, and you're probably reading this on your computer, that uses Taiwanese chips, and a Korean monitor, assembled by Bangladeshi workers in a Singapore plant, transported by Indian truck drivers, hijacked by Indonesians, unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen, and trucked to you by Mexican illegals.....
You forgot the Canadian based web site, launched by an Australian with alien intervention. 
However, this whole section actually does not have anything to do with Princess Diana's death. It is just related to your post.
I saw the news about Princess Diana's death on TV shortly after it had happened. I suppose you might be able to come up with a similar list related to nationality of new anchors, news agencies, TV technology, TV manufacturing, etc.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
modified 18-May-14 4:58am.
|
|
|
|
|
What year is it? I thought this type of sh*t stopped being E-Mailed around in the early 2000's.
.-.
|o,o|
,| _\=/_ .-""-.
||/_/_\_\ /[] _ _\
|_/|(_)|\\ _|_o_LII|_
\._. |\_/|"` |_| ==== |_|
|_|_| ||" || ||
|-|-| ||LI o ||
|_|_| ||'----'||
/_/ \_\ /__| |__\
|
|
|
|
|
I believe JSOP's PC has started forwarding ancient emails to randomly generated addresses 
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
... because I tore some of it out debugging an old FORTRAN program today. They should torture people who use subroutines with multiple ENTRY points by making them debug them. At least I didn't have to wade through any COMPUTED GOTO's this time!
Is there any other language that allows such means of obfuscation in what appears at first glance to be perfectly readable code?
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, this begs the question, why were you debugging some old FORTRAN today? That sounds like an interesting story of its own.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I need a reservoir simulator for some consulting work and I don't have time to write my own from scratch. I did that in grad school about 30 years ago, I don't have the source code (it was on punch cards), and it wasn't complete enough for actual use - it was just to run class problems and get a grade. The commercial ones cost like $5K - 10K per month to rent a license and my client doesn't have a budget for anything approaching that. I also want the software for other uses, where there is no budget.
It happens that the US DOE sponsored development of a simulator and the source code is public domain. You can download the software and source code from the DOE web site[^]. Unfortunately most of the compiled versions won't run on modern Windows systems. Only the BOAST98 system will run, but it includes a graphics interface and I want something that I can tweak and customize, perhaps even incorporate into some other stuff. The supposedly latest version, BOASTVHS, has obvious source code problems and it looks like someone grabbed some stuff out of the trash to throw up on a web site. It has SUBROUTINE calls where the number and type of parameters don't match, etc. It's mess.
Since I did get the BOAST3 source code to run using f2c and gcc on Linux many moons ago, I decided that BOAST3 would be a good place to start. So, I needed to take the source code and find a way to compile it. Most of the changes were pretty easy, but it took many hours of tracing and testing to find the ENTRY point problems. I compiled and ran it using the GNU compiler, gfortran, so no real nice debugger. I was back to sticking in WRITE statements and rerunning, just like I did many years ago.
At any rate it is now apparently working, so I can go on with the rest of the project. It would be nice to be able to convert the code to run on .NET, but looking at the structure, I think that would be a difficult and frustrating task.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Reading this interesting tale of code-archaeology, for some reason the words from Robert Service's ballad "The Cremation of Sam McGee" came to my mind:
"There are strange things done 'neath the midnight sun
By the men who moil for gold.
The arctic trails have their secret tales
That would make your blood run cold."
cheers, Bill
“I speak in a poem of the ancient food of heroes: humiliation, unhappiness, discord. Those things are given to us to transform, so that we may make from the miserable circumstances of our lives things that are eternal, or aspire to be so.” Jorge Luis Borges
|
|
|
|
|
My brother turned me on to Robert Service many years ago, my favorite is The shooting of Dan McGrew.
When out of the night which was 50 below and into the din and glare
There stumbled a miner fresh from the creek, dog dirty and loaded for bear
Along with Antimatter and Dark Matter they've discovered the existence of Doesn't Matter which appears to have no effect on the universe whatsoever!
Rich Tennant 5th Wave
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds familiar, actually. Back in the late 80's I worked for a defense contractor. I worked briefly on an effort to aggregate results from a number of flight control simulations, some of which dated from the 60's, all of which were written in one dialect of FORTRAN or another. As I recall we decided not to pursue the contract, because it would require too much effort to build the tools necessary to convert all of the code to a common form.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Um...not according to your profile pic. 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: not according to your profile pic
A number of years ago, a colleague was switching from being a co-op to a full time employee. Part of the process was a drug test; they required 3 months worth of hair growth to conduct the test.
He basically kept his hair in a crew cut since he didn't know about the impending drug test.
When he arrived and they looked at his head, they said he had two options... he lifted his arm very quickly.
When I switched from a contractor to an employee, I delayed my hair cut until AFTER the testing was complete.
|
|
|
|
|
Not a problem I would have - I could give 'em a dozen years of drug testable material! 
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I keep it combed back, but there is sufficient hair on my head. I have to get it thinned every time I go to the barber.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Debugging it is fun, ever tried re-writing it?
One of my apps is C++ with one routine written in 'optimised' F77. One day I thought "Having one FORTRAN source code file in this project is silly, I'll quickly re-write that in C++, just because".
Between entry points and multiple, nested labelled GOTOs - trying to replicate the flow through the original code was mind boggling.
It would actually be easier to replicate the function of the code in C++ from scratch, than to directly re-write it.
In the end, it wasn't broke, so I didn't 'fix' it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I've rewritten lots of Fortran. Depending on how it was structured, it can be easy or it can be a nightmare. I'm afraid this bunch of source code would be a nightmare, but I may attempt it some day if I have time and need a challenge.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently, since at least version 10, IE refuses to keep any manually added websites in the Compatibility View list if the option to 'Delete Browsing history on exit' is turned on. 
After an update to IE 11, one of the web applications used at my Saturday job refused to work correctly in 'Edge' mode. Adding the website to the Compatibility View list solved the problem. If, for whatever reason, the browser was closed and reopened, the web application would again fail, due to the previously added website mysteriously dissappearing from the CV list. For a week they have been on chats and remotes with 3 different technicians from the website purveyor to get it sorted out. The transcripts are in front of me now and it seems they were only interested in closing the ticket...explain that their application only works under IE 10 or less...nope Chrome won't work, neither will Firefox...we tried them all. There is a rewrite for the application scheduled, but it won't be available until next year. They screw with some of the IE advanced settings, re-add the website to the CV and all is well. Case/ticket resolved, 'see, it works'. The next time the application was restarted, the CV setting was gone.  For a week, they have had to manually add the website into the CV each and every time to use the application. The culprit was the 'Delete Browsing History on exit' setting.
I understand how the connection between the two could be missed the first time, but three support techs completely missed the solution even when the customer explained the symptoms quite clearly. I don't understand why MS decided this was the way to do it, and I don't understand why someone would need to delete the browser cache every time it closed, but that's not the point. I should be able to do both. Better yet, I should expect that a company selling monthly subscriptions for a 'state of the art' web based service should be able to correct some silly browser display problems that keep it from working correctly in any newer common browsers. It's not rocket science guys!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
