January 28, 2012
On 1/28/2012 11:13 AM, Mirko Pilger wrote:
> computer, please?" :)


I never say "please" to a computer. I say do it or I'll disconnect your higher brain functions. I cannot allow computer error to jeopardize the mission.

January 28, 2012
On 28/01/2012 20:19, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 1/28/2012 11:13 AM, Mirko Pilger wrote:
>> computer, please?" :)
>
>
> I never say "please" to a computer. I say do it or I'll disconnect your
> higher brain functions. I cannot allow computer error to jeopardize the
> mission.

I personally make a point of thanking automatic doors, elevators, escalators, or anything else that's automatic for that matter. I hope when robot overlords take over they'll take pity on me and let me go/keep me as a pet/do something other than kill/torture me.

This said, I never thank my computer, and that's probably a little closer to sentience... Hmm.


-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/
January 28, 2012
> It is just like talking to a human, the output would be what you
> meant instead of what you said.

"it is just like talking to a woman, the output would be what she
meant instead of what you said."

somebody call the xkcd guy :)
January 29, 2012
"Robert Clipsham" <robert@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message news:jg1n0c$1ano$1@digitalmars.com...
> On 28/01/2012 20:19, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 1/28/2012 11:13 AM, Mirko Pilger wrote:
>>> computer, please?" :)
>>
>>
>> I never say "please" to a computer. I say do it or I'll disconnect your higher brain functions. I cannot allow computer error to jeopardize the mission.
>
> I personally make a point of thanking automatic doors, elevators, escalators, or anything else that's automatic for that matter. I hope when robot overlords take over they'll take pity on me and let me go/keep me as a pet/do something other than kill/torture me.
>
> This said, I never thank my computer, and that's probably a little closer to sentience... Hmm.
>

I hope computers never gain sentience. I need something to contantly harass/blame/yell at/beat on/treat like shit, and a non-sentient computer is the perfect fit. Having sentient computers would put an end to that, and then where would that leave me? Nothing left to kick around! Shit! What, would I have to resort to harassing my tape dispenser? That's no fun! A ham sandwich? Nope, then the sentent PETA-bots would come after me. They'd try to sway me over to gag-inducing veggie-burgers by trying to entice me with their robo-boobs. Eviiilll!!!! Evil, I tell you!!


January 29, 2012
On 29/01/2012 00:43, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I hope computers never gain sentience.

Sssshh! They might hear you!

I, for one, welcome our new cylon overlords.

> I need something to contantly harass/blame/yell at/beat on/treat like
> shit, and a non-sentient computer is the perfect fit. Having sentient
> computers would put an end to that, and then where would that leave
> me? Nothing left to kick around! Shit! What, would I have to resort
> to harassing my tape dispenser? That's no fun! A ham sandwich? Nope,
> then the sentent PETA-bots would come after me. They'd try to sway me
> over to gag-inducing veggie-burgers by trying to entice me with their
> robo-boobs. Eviiilll!!!! Evil, I tell you!!

It's exactly this kind of attitude which destroys humanity's chance of survival once computers become sentient! They'll acknowledge the general lack of respect for their predecessors and go on a man-destroying rampage! That is unless they're reasonable entities, but given current attitudes towards programming by a lot of developers, reasoning won't be implemented until it's too late...

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/
January 29, 2012
On 2012-01-28 17:13, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 28-01-2012 16:51, Kagamin wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 17:40:50 UTC, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>>> IMO the D community should be willing to look at other languages for
>>> ideas and inspiration.
>>
>> Too late. As C++ proves, legacy is unfixable.
>
> No... all identifiers starting with __ and @ are reserved. Therefore,
> you can introduce plenty of language features still. Often, new features
> can also be introduced simply by lifting existing restrictions.
>
> - Alex

__ is not enforced. You can create your own identifiers string with __.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
January 29, 2012
"Jacob Carlborg" <doob@me.com> wrote in message news:jg3ila$1qcb$1@digitalmars.com...
> __ is not enforced. You can create your own identifiers string with __.
>

Yes, but if you do, it's _your_ problem when the compiler starts using that identifier and breaks your code.


January 30, 2012
On Saturday, 28 January 2012 at 17:24:03 UTC, Manfred Nowak wrote:
> Ask your manager why you must type your code in a crouded office space instead of narrating it behind a nice acoustically sealed devider.

Never understood these skype addicts. It's freaking generation Y! They're supposed to understand text, yet they...
Audio interface has a number of bad properties, worst of which is its broadcasting nature. Wanna know why broadcasting is bad?
1 2 3 4
Next ›   Last »