The second derivative. So I started reading ‘Use vr.s Reuse, or The Second Derivitive of Programming’ (sic), and soon enough bumped into some points I disagree with, I thought they were eager over-generalizations. But reading some more, I realized I misread myself into disagreement too quickly. So I learned something new, and a few paragraphs later learned something else.
‘Second derivative’ is an excellent term to bring up in discussion. For one it will make you sound smarter, which we all know is the whole point of speaking. But on a serious note, as presented by Brian (echoing Robert), it’s actually a very simple concept to explain to others, and take the conversation up one level of abstraction. So go read.
Friends like this. Facebook: It’s Not Just for Kids Anymore… (And It Does XML, Too). I might be totally misreading this post, perhaps it is all about Facebook and the future of social networks, but I get this nagging feeling of maybe some sort of subliminal message peeking through, something, maybe like, “Facebook does XML and you should too!”
So let’s take a minute to review how Facebook does XML:
- FBML, actually, and it’s a proprietary format that only works on Facebook.
- It lets developers visit their platform but not take out the data.
- Only took a few short months for these applications to become spam.
- One reason why Facebook keeps changing FBML, and breaking applications.
None of the above is a condemnation of XML itself, it would just as well have happened to any other format they would use, koolkid darling JSON not exempt. Just, how does the saying goes … with friends like these, who needs enemies?
Too bad, because the other subliminal message of that post is, use XMLSpy, which I happen to think is a good product especially for dealing with the complexity that schemas can bring.
Public service announcement. Apropos this and a few other posts crowding my feed reader:
Please,
No more cool by association posts.
Much appreciated,
the management
Measure twice, cut once. Kent Newsome about the hidden agendas behind the global (non)warming debate:
I think there should be a law, with a very stiff penalty for violations, that every person who opines on global warming has to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Who do you work for? Who funds your research? Who funds whoever funds your research? Are you a spoon-fed Republican or Democrat? Do you own a bunch of stock in companies who would be harmed by climate initiatives? Do you have grandchildren?
Interesting, but I think it’s a different issue altogether. The problem is the piece of entertainment that passes as the 10 o’clock news. All it takes is for one person to suggest proof that 2+2=5, and all of a sudden we have a debate going on, and we need to witness two experts, one from each camp arguing over advance math using layterms, all in the name of exploring this new deep fracture within our scientific community.
If MSM did its journalistic duty to investigate, qualify and give equal weight — not equal parts, equal weight — to both view points, I doubt most people would have even heard of global non-warming.
Not liking what I read. Jeremy McAnally, on the sad state of Rails documenation: Conventions are a Good Thing(â„¢)! Geoffrey Grosenbach, on the sad state of Rails documenation: Is there a working configuration?
And because of the juxtaposition and pun, just to clarify, there’s no “debate” going on, we all agree Rails documentation needs a lot of TLC, these two posts explore the problem from different perspectives.