Here are some interchangeable euphemisms for test:
Tapped commenting on a C-SPAN call-in show. Someone called in rebutting a journalistic who used ellipses which essentially changed the meaning of a John Kerry quote.
]]>For example, in the past year both the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post have published op-eds by James Schlesinger, a former Secretary of Energy, Defense, and director of the CIA who has now taken to emphasizing the uncertainties of climate science (as a way of diminishing what scientists do know). In the Post, Schlesinger discussed limitations to the IPCC's analysis - a scientific critique launched not in a scientific journal but on an op-ed page. Indeed, when asked by Inhofe at a hearing to comment on Schlesinger's writings, University of Virginia climate scientist Michael Mann responded, "I am not familiar with any peer-reviewed work that he has submitted to the scientific literature."
]]>I was thinking along the same lines last evening, and I came up with a small theory that explains why so few pople can be bothered to learn Ada. It goes like this: There are 3 types of languages.
The first type of language says "we're going to make programming easy". Of course, this is a lie, because programming is inherently difficult and no language can make it easy. These languages fake it by being simplistic. Java is the most prominent member of this family of languages; most scripting languages also fall in this category. Beginners tend to flock to these "easy" languages and never learn proper programming skills (like e.g. memory management. If some Java "guru" reads this, ask yourself this one question: how many threads does your program have, and please justify the existence of each thread).
The second type says "we will let you do anything, absolutely anything you want, and the power is in the hands of the True Programmers". Languages in this category include, among others, C and C++. Many people take a foolish pride in being called a True Programmer, and therefore like these languages. I myself once was in this category: I would show off my skills by writing a single-line program that nobody else could read. But humans write bugs, and these languages don't lend a hand finding these. Hence the famous buffer overflows.
The third type is what I would call the "zen master" type of languages. They treat you like an apprentice, slapping you on the hand each time you make a small mistake, and they scorn at you for choosing the quick and easy path -- which leads to the Dark Side. If you accept their teachings, you quickly become a Master yourself. If you rebel against them, you will never achieve Enlightenment and will always produce bugs. The "zen master" languages are Pascal, Modula, Oberon, and, master of masters, Ada. The beauty of these languages is that, once you are Enlightened, you can apply your wisdom to other languages as well -- but often would prefer not to.
-- Ludovic Brenta.
]]>Weren't a lot of hits but this luckily came up. No telling how much time I would have spent tracking this down. Darn Hollies, they were never a distinctive sound.
]]>Here is the link: RealAudio
]]>Assistant to the Editor: Karen Hustoft
Associate Editor: Grant Davis
So I thought to make up a combination name "Grant Hustoft". To make sure that this was somewhat original, I did a google search on Grant + Hustoft.
Second match that came up was an U.D. Army Prog software engineer that I know with the first name Grant. I know this was the same guy because it came off a UND web site, which is where he went to school.
Bottomline, this is a case of very small odds of any individual match combining with a large space of knowledge to match against.
]]>