S.o.s!!

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

I think what I have said is fairly clear. Re-read my search engine example as what is an algorithmic challenge these days (just due to the sheer scale of things). Just as your enterprise-type "IT" projects can scale, so can other "projects" ... specifically those that have had to scale with the Internet or Moore's law (both of which obviously scale much faster that most enterprises).

Can't take the challenge?
LOL If you really think that "the search results you get from google, etc etc etc ..." is enough to - - even when you add "due to the scale of things:"
1. Functionally specify the goals
2. Describe the challenges of a proposed solution
3.Put into evidence the algorithmic nature of the challenges
Then you're funny - to say the least, because it may mean that you have no idea of what an IT project is. Even micro-projects require some kind of functional specifications and "solution" documents, and it's needless to remind that a professional or enterprise grade search engine is far from being a micro-project.

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

I think what I have said is fairly clear. Re-read my search engine example as what is an algorithmic challenge these days (just due to the sheer scale of things). Just as your enterprise-type "IT" projects can scale, so can other "projects" ... specifically those that have had to scale with the Internet or Moore's law (both of which obviously scale much faster that most enterprises).

[Siamanto]

Re: S.o.s!!

Siamanto, you are CLEARLY demonstrating how little knowledge you have of how algorithms have been evolving. You see the word "algorithm" and you seem to associate it with known results such as QuickSort or Dijkstra's shortest path or some other elementary text book example. Just making a RIDICULOUS statement such as "algorithms are not a challenge anymore" (which I do paraphrase to "dismissing as child's play" whether you like it or not) shows you have a LOT of catching up to do in this domain.

Again, you have demonstrated your poor reading and reasoning skills.
1. No, I am not equating alorithms to "QuickSort or Dijkstra's shortest path or some other elementary text book example" and nothing in what I have said imply or suggest such a reduction. Just curious, how did you come to that conclusion: certainly not logically.
2. No, "algorithms are not a challenge anymore" does not mean "dismissing as child's play"

Can the reality be that because you've been exposed to nothing but college type micro-projects and have no idea/knowledge of the challenges of large scale IT infrastructures and software production, you can't see beyond algorithms? So far, your arguments and views suggest it - not limited to this thread.

If you really think algorithms are not a challenge anymore, I guess you are quite satisfied with your email clients ability to filter spam, the amazing
efficiency of airlines, traffic congestions in large cities, the search results you get from google, etc etc etc ...

I don't know what you mean by "efficiency of airlines" but, the challenges of the other problems, listed above, are different and should be considered differently and it is not clear what you have in mind: why don't you tell us what are the challenges of the above (four) problems and let's take it from there?

Do you REALLY want to insist on claiming that those are solved problems?

Another example of your poor reasoning skills? Why are you assuming that the challenges of the above problems are algorithmic in nature? As I have suggested, why don't you state the problems and challenges and let's see if they are algorithmic in nature? You may be surprised.

I am not even going to bring AI into this ... as I'm sure you will claim that AI algorithms are also not a challenge and they are good enough to build your airport.

Please feel free to "bring" anything you think you should; in any case, we both know that you will "bring" anything you can.

Re: S.o.s!!

I guess one could also distinguish pure and applied CS?

Obviously. "Pure" CS deals with theory of computation, complexity theory, analysis of algorithms...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoretical_computer_science

A good intro btw is the book by Sipser:

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Second-Michael/dp/0534950973

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

Aha ... thanks for the link ... I hadn't seen that thread.

On a related yet unrelated note, the recent discussion here did make me start to think about the line or distinction between algorithm and theory. Much like the parallel with "pure" and "applied" math or physics, I guess one could also distinguish pure and applied CS?

Re: S.o.s!!

Sip, that was meant as a joke.
(see http://forum.armenianclub.com/showpo...2&postcount=90)

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

Axel, if you mean "academics" (as the crew), I should probably clarify that I have never seen myself as, or identified myself with academics so I will not be defending any of that crew here I have always been (or tried to be) a "doer" as in one who looks for a real problem and works towards solving it.

At the same time, I can certainly appreciate algorithmic elegance and the beauty of a well founded theoretical approach ... but I have NEVER been one to subscribe to the school of theory for the sake of theory.

Edit: By the way, I still think QuickSort is cool (obviously not a challenge though) ... But if that makes me a naive idiot, so be it

[Sip]

Re: S.o.s!!

Who exactly is "my crew"?

Re: S.o.s!!

Do you REALLY want to insist on claiming that those are solved problems? I am not even going to bring AI into this ...

Whether it pleases you or not, I will speak for all those who are fed up with "your crew's" crap and manipulations.

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Re: S.o.s!!

known results such as QuickSort

Apparently some people seem to be still enthusiastic about quicksort (see chapter 3 of the book "Beautiful Code" )

fails to recognize that all of what he is talking about is restricted to a very specific and limited computing domain

Yes but the fact that a lot of industrial activity fall into this domain can make it appear (to practitioners) as the alpha and omega of computer science. Still software engineering/architecture is but a small part of CS (one which is actually often despised in academic circles)