ICC pissed me off when I let my subscription lapse for 9 months and wouldn't reactivate my account that I had for 15 years. I had ~ 15000 blitz games under my handle and dozens of contacts. All gone and they couldn't care less.
Umm. 'My system' is worth reading but only so you have an understanding of what you are unlearning as you get stronger. In this day and age it is a long way from all you need to know, chess is much less dogmatic and more objective. The demands of the position trumps nimzowitsch's rules.
I am polyglot too but my skills are still finite. I bet you still choose from a finite set of technologies rather than the best tool for the job. Otherwise you are playing with your clients money, and you can't really know a tool is right for the job unless you have some experience.
I agree with the main point but disagree with the often regurgitated utopia of choosing the right platform/language to fit the problem. That has never been an option in my experience, and even it was an option there would be multiple equally good choices available. The ultimate decision on what choice to make will be influenced by many other factors, team skills, experience, availability of talent, long term strategy, risk....
You can apply your first statement to most things in life. When people think things are boring, most of the time it is because they don't understand the nuances, history etc
This would be a good example for that 4chan list. [Mundane x] vs [Mundane Y], Let me tell you how little you know (and I didn't know either until yesterday)
The problem is they effectively know all your accounts are the same. Your IP addresses/ browser / os / screen res etc are pretty much a fingerprint. Let alone any other ml techniques they can apply.
I like ORMs but in my experience the best approach is to use a hybrid of ORM, views and sprocs. Ideally each sproc will return the results of querying a view or at a minimum the identical columns, then the views become 1st class entities in your ORM like anything else (except for updatable views which I shy away from).
So personally I vow never to write an insert, update or delete again, but I am certainly happy to write queries and tune them if necessary.
The one thing that trumps nosql / denormalisation in my opinion is materialised views. Materialised views are a thing of beauty that allow for the design integrity of normalized data and the performance of denormalised data. It seems most people don't use them / understand them because they use b-grade free database engines.
You never stop hearing people complain about nulls,types/precedence and joins in SQL, but seriously it isn't that hard to learn. These are the main things that people complain about and regurgitate endlessly, so a little effort would be a big reward.
Given it is relatively new tech. Who is qualified to write about? Presumably by the end the authors did know a bit. Don't you think such articles, assuming they are objective, might be useful to others that are thinking of dipping their toes in the water?
Call me a luddite if you like, and I will probably be left behind in work and life, but I really can't shake the feeling that Bitcoin is an unworkable bad idea. Taking into account the risks of theft, the risk of government legislation, the risk of the system being gamed, the risk of wild fluctuations in value without rhyme or reason....
Table bases do include pawns. I don't think anyone would think humans are stronger than the best computers even if the computer didn't have opening books and table bases, I was just saying that to compare ratings isn't really fair.
If you encouraged you son to do no opening preparation, aside from general principles, encouraged him to turn up at the board physically fit, full of energy, concentration and determination to win instead of tired a sallow from spending all his time studying, then he would be killing it even more. Those other players may now and then score the odd point from their preparation, but usually only against other preparation junkies.
Correct. Carlsen has destroyed the preparation/memory junkies. Chess did flounder for a while as everyone started using computers for preparation and helping memorize openings, but it has been made redundant by his style of play.
The problem with this assessment is that computers basically cheat. Carlsen isn't allowed to turn up to a game with an openings book, and some way of looking up all possible 7 piece or less endgames.(if I remember correctly), but the computer can. Another way of looking at is that if Carlsen had all that information at his disposal every time he played another human, his rating would be 300+ higher than everyone else as well.
I think the fact it is an anachronism is what makes it worth continuing. It has a history.
There is a lineage stretching back to the 1800's. It is a significant thing to beat the current champion, who beat the previous champion etc. And the process of selecting the candidate to challenge the champion hasn't always been perfect, but in general it is pretty good and fair.
And regardless of ratings / performance etc, the World Champion is a match play champion. Elo is a very objective way of deciding who is generally the strongest player, and that is published and acknowledged. There is on and off : a world knockout champion, a world blitz champion, a world rapid play champion. So loads of other different scenarios are taken care of, so why not preserve the match play champion lineage.
The problem with the 'science' is that the main study done on this topic cherry picked the countries it included in the results and excluded some 20 countries. If you only is d data from the excluded countries you would find the reverse correlation. One has to be very careful to look out for confirmation bias in research.
Who are you writing the comments for? If yourself as pseudocode, fine, but get rid of them when you are finished. If you are writing them for another developer down the road, that developer will either ignore them because he really doesn't know for sure the comments can be trusted, or will blindly trust the comments and now and then will get burned.
On the downside it can't do aggregates, it can't do query filters on more than one property, it can't do joins, it has its own unique query language, and it is a proprietary system with no chance of moving to another provider or hosting it yourself.
Speaking of it having its own query language, perhaps that isn't a big deal given you can't do any non-trivial queries.
For me, the pejorative NoSQL claim is actually a marketing turn off.
Maybe not insanity, but I would find it a little noisy reading that code, like having to code at a desk near the receptionist.
I wouldn't mind if the comment said "using qucksort because n is expected to be large". But only if the choice of quicksort over some other algorithm was deemed significant.
I personally favour only commenting on the unusual. I also think that if you are doing TDD then the tests should do a good job of documenting the code. I can't count the number of times someone has asked me to explain some code I have written where my first response is "okay, let's look at the tests".
All that being said, it really depends on the scenario. My second last project was a shrink wrap product development that ran a million dollar plus accompanying piece of hardware. This project quite rightly required us to write thorough and consistent comments and docs. Expensive product, complex code, high risk = thorough docs. I am currently working for a small rapidly growing and changing business, where the software is mostly internal. Low risk, quick development required, constant change, low complexity = waste of time and money creating and maintaining good docs
Ditto. And ditto about being careful not to let your quirky mnemonic slip. My wife and I met a couple at a party a while ago, then met them 6 months later at another party. My wife quickly asked me if I remembered their names and I said, yeh Quiche Lorraine and Brad pitt (their names are Lorraine and Brad). Of course we then met them again another 6 months later and my wife having had a few drinks let blurt, 'hey, its quiche lorraine'