You are not smart


Yeah, I don't exactly know who you are, but here's my guarantee. You are not smarter than AT LEAST 17 out of these 29 people, and probably not smarter than all of them. Further you will not contribute any where near as much to our understanding of the universe as them. Have a nice day.

1927 Photo via Digg

(Top Row, left to right) A. Piccard, A. Henriot, P. Ehrenfest, Ed. Herzen, Th. De Donder, M. Schrödinger, Y. Verschaffelt, W. Pauli, W. Heisenberg, R.H. Fowler, L. Brillouin.
(Middle Row, left to right) P. Debye, M. Knudsen, W.L. Bragg, H.A. Kramers, P.A.M. Dirac, A.H. Compton, L. deBroglie, M. Born, N. Bohr.
(Bottom Row, left to right) I. Langmuir, M. Planck, Madame. Curie, H.A. Lorentz, A. Einstein, P. Langevin, Ch. A Guye, C.T.R. Wilson, and O.W. Richardson.

D

Remember Zork?

I'm not really in the mood for political commentary, I dunno, I just feel like I'm in a funk today. However, my friend passed this on and I couldn't ignore it:

defective yeti: Xyzzy

Man this is priceless... it's so perfectly reminiscent of Zork.

Smart Elevators

Fujitec eases bottlenecks via Slashdot

Why has this taken so long to invent? This seems like the most straight forward thing in the world to do. Actually, even easier, why can't I just unselect a button that I've accidentally selected? Or how about when I get in the elevator if there is no one in it and nothing is selected and it says "going up", when I select something, could you just go that way instead of closing the door and reopening it for ... no one? Thanks.

Why, Fox, Why??

Arrested Development via Chris Pirillo

#1, if you're not watching Arrested Development. START NOW.

#2, see #1.

#3, if you have, in any way, the power to convince Fox, Showtime or ABC to pick it up, please do so. I'll be glad to pay, and I know there are many many other people who would like to as well.

#4, if you work at Fox, please re-evaluate your bar for what gets renewed/funded, and what doesn't. As a guideline, please use this list:

  • Dark Angel - Yes
  • Titus - No
  • Undeclared - YES
  • Action - No
  • That 80's show - No
  • Wonderfalls - No
  • Fastlane - No
  • Andy Richter Controls the Universe - No
  • Skin - No
  • Girls Club - No
  • Cracking Up - No
  • The Pitts - No
  • Firefly - YES
  • Get Real - No
  • Freakylinks - No
  • Wanda at Large - No
  • Costello - No
  • The Lone Gunmen - No
  • A Minute with Stan Hooper - No
  • Normal, Ohio - No
  • Pasadena - No
  • Harsh Realm - No
  • Keen Eddie - Yes (kind of... I liked it anyway)
  • The Street - No
  • The Embassy - No
  • Cedric the Entertainer - No
  • The Tick - YES
  • Luis - No
  • Greg the Bunny - YES

Man, look at that hit and miss list. That is so bad I can't even fathom it. Not to mention the endless littany of reality TV that they put on that is beyond unwatchable... Going back to that post earlier in the day, what do you think they're solving for? Because it's clearly not quality television or ratings.

The Root Cause

James Gosling has a wonderful post today that lots of people could get a lot of value from reading. From the text, James Gosling: on the Java Road:
" Back when I was a grad student I was spinning out of control trying to come up with a thesis topic. My advisor took me out to lunch one day and asked me a simple question: 'What is a PhD thesis?' I yattered on for a while and he listened patiently. Eventually he said 'No: It's just a stack of 100 pages with 4 signatures on top'. "

What do you need to solve? If your goal is to solve the world's problems, identify what the solution looks like and go do the things necessary to archieve that. But most people don't need that at all. I'll use a personal example... my fiancee and I are planning a wedding (the process of removing weeds from ones yard). There seem to be a THOUSAND requirements on the day, but there aren't. There's realistically only one. Get a ring on her finger in a legally binding way. Ok, so that's a bit naive... there are actually two, get a ring on her finger in a legally binding way, and have an unbelievably fun time doing it. That's basically it. Who comes, where they sit, what they eat... those are all incidental. I love this way of thinking.

More errors

As much as I like Visual Studio, I have to get mad at the boys and girls building it for this one.

It is an error to use a section registered as allowDefinition='MachineToApplication' beyond application level. This error can be caused by a virtual directory not being configured as an applicationin IIS.

Here's the link that I found as the problem summary and the solution:

http://www.thescripts.com/forum/thread335430.html

Apparently the most common problem is that you have too many web.config files. Really, VS people? Couldn't you have said that that is the problem? How many times are people really redefining the "allowDefiniton='MachineToApplication'" in sub-web.config files? This error message is completely just identifying the symptom and almost universally ignoring the root cause.

D