- Can you prove they didn t? The last major stock market crashes we had in the UK were down to electronic trading systems going awol and playing silly games ofMessage 1 of 74 , Sep 23, 2008View SourceCan you prove they didn't? The last major stock market crashes we had in the UK were down to electronic trading systems going awol and playing silly games of "who can dump their stock on the market fastest" ... one bug in that kind of software can wreak havoc upon a bank.
Lets take a hypothetical ... the devs at an afforementioned bank just got on and wrote their mortgage risk assesment software, skipping TDD and SOLID as it would have been too hard and stopped them delivering the software quickly. It happens that their software was a little too happy to say "approved", and because the margin of error in the rounding it was using was only out by half a percent, and because more mortgages approved meant more commission, nobody investigated too hard.Can you tell me for sure that better mortgage software at other bank didn't help protect them? I know of no trader who isn't totally and utterly dependent upon software to base all their decisions on.Now I know of one major mortgage provider in the UK, and I know which company wrote the software that was used to do the calculations and approvals, and I know the quality of the devs on that project ... I would be surprised if their software was right even 80% of the time ...Just becasue CNN didn't blame bad software for the crash of Lehmans, doesn't mean it didn't have an influence.2008/9/23 jdn3times <jdn3times@...>
Referring to your post (which I agree with 100% except for the 'go
home' part, refer to rest of sentence to follow, starting.....now),
the rest of the business world will get on creating business apps
that provide real everyday value, ignoring all these artsy-fartsy
discussions about best practices, cuddling, etc.
As I've said before, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, etc. did not
collapse because of a lack of a separation of concerns.
jdn> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Casey Charlton <casey@...>wrote:
--- In email@example.com, "Ayende Rahien" <Ayende@...> wrote:
> Hm, I hope so.
> Flame on.
>> > 2008/9/23 Bill Barry <after.fallout@...>
> > There is nothing you can say on this list (at least technically)
> > out of order ... opinions are opinions ...
> >> >> 2008/9/23 Sebastien Lambla <seb@...>
> > If I've said anything that sounded anti-MS, rest assured that
> >> my intentions. I am not anti-MS at all, merely anti-"MS or bust"
> >> against anything that would encourage such a viewpoint.
> >> Certain portions of MS do rightly deserve bashing for pushing
> >> but I don't think that is for this list. Other things tick me
off about many
> >> companies (MS included) and I see no reason not to call such
> >> attention when they occur (as I do on my blog), but again I
don't think that
> >> is for this list.
> >> If anybody says anything that shouldn't be on this list lets
> >> something to check ourselves before letting it out of hand.
Remember that we
> >> are self governing with almost no moderation and I for one do
not want to
> >> have to have to call something to the attention of a moderator
> >> closing/deletion/banning.
> >> Casey Charlton wrote:
> >> Yep ... for all it's faults MS has made some superb software,
> >> superb frameworks, they just turn out a piece of dross now and
then ... but
> >> on the whole, I would say most MS stuff is pretty darn good.
> >> I'm certainly not anti-MS, just anti-stagnation.
> >>> >>> From: mdbrown@...
> >>> I feek quite uncomfortable with the focus that seems to be
> >>> at the moment around choosing alternatives to microsoft.
Microsoft is a
> >>> vendor amongst others, and alt.net is about being respoinsible
> >>> pragmatic in your adoption of choices and go with what works
> >>> guidance.
> >>> This focus on Microsoft (and the monopoly on tools i keep
> >>> is diverting from the real issues of empowerment and self-
> >>> have been the focus and efforts of many of us.
> >>> I jsut wonder if there's a communication problem there between
> >>> waves of arrivals in the alt.net movement or if this original
> >>> MS-bashing just didn't get to me until now.
> >>> Seb
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org> >>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:20 PM, George Mauer <gmauer@...>
> >>> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:02:17 -0400
> >>> Subject: RE: [altdotnet] Re: Is Alt.Net becoming equivalent to
> >>> andvanced CS curriculum?
> >>> The core tenet of Alt.NET is that there are other ways to
> >>> issues than using what is delivered by Microsoft.
> >>> The Java world only has Alt…Sun does not innovate on the
> >>> even the language for that matter these days, read the story on
> >>> of Generic support in Java). Until very recently, the EJB spec
was driven by
> >>> the interests of 3rd party vendors rather than what would be
> >>> developers. If you want to find a framework to address your
> >>> Java, you HAVE to look to the open source/third party community.
> >>> *From:* email@example.com
> >>> Behalf Of *Ayende Rahien
> >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 23, 2008 2:34 PM
> >>> *To:* firstname.lastname@example.org
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [altdotnet] Re: Is Alt.Net becoming equivalent
> >>> andvanced CS curriculum?
> >>> It is not alt there :-)
> >>> Good point,
> >>> I know nothing about the Java or Cpp world, are there any
> >>> teach these ideas there?
> >>> ------------------------------> >>> Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger! Try it Now!<http://
- I agree with this totally, I am fairly new to altdotnet and I am also fairly young. Where I work there are only two developers and we are alsoMessage 74 of 74 , Oct 14, 2008View SourceI agree with this totally, I am fairly new to altdotnet and I am also
fairly young. Where I work there are only two developers and we are
also testers/designers/everything so when we decided that we could
write better software by following the altdotnet principles we had a
hard time finding a starting place amongst all the available
information. It is just overwhelming, and I know we have been talking
about easing the entrance barrier, but it's just not that easy. There
has to be some difficulty or is the reward is not as great. However,
I do believe that some type of curriculum charg would be a great tool
for everyone involved with altdotnet at any level. Just to show how
the different principles build on each other and relate to each other
so you have a reference point you can find yourself on.
On the other topic in this thread about the CS Curriculum in
colleges, I graduated from a small college in Oklahoma with a degree
in CS a few years ago. I personally gained a lot from college b/c I
had a professor who had previusly worked in the real world, and I
worked in the real world developing software while in college so we
could have intelligent conversations that nobody else understood.
This was great for me, a self motivator, but not for everybody else.
I have now been asked to teach some software courses at the college
and help, along with other alumni to revamp the curriculum that is
taught in the school. I am teaching two semesters worth of altdotnet
curriculum now, 1 in the spring and one next fall. This will be a
huge leap ahead for the students, but also for the faculty. I think
overall though what college is really designed to teach students is
HOW to think and HOW to learn because a college cannot be expected to
keep up with all the latest and greatest trends in Software
engineering but it can teach students some higher level principles
such as altdotnet.
--- In email@example.com, "George Mauer" <gmauer@...> wrote:
> This thread has started to devolve into another discussing the
> shortcomings of software engineering/computer science curricula
> - while we are all in agreement - was not my intention.
> Instead, I'm trying to propose that maybe Alt.Net should have its
> curricula. For professionlas, not college age kids. It would
> have a cascading sets of ideas in 'once you learn this, go on to
> learning this' fashion, maybe even a set of must-read books and
> articles for each. Maybe even a sample program for each.
> It would be structured to explain why a concept is necessary, what
> knowledge it depends on, what it enables, and what tools you would
> to exercise it.
> At the very least, this would give those of us still learning (most
> us?) a very vague idea of how far we are from the asymtope.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "George Mauer" <gmauer@> wrote: