| Posted: May 14, 2005, 7:55 pm - IP Logged | |
I programmed the C-64 as well, but it sounds like I started a little earlier than you: I also programmed Commodore PETs and VIC-20s. I learned machine code in order to squeeze code in a small space (plus make it run faster), so I understand your point about sloppy coding.
We all tend to look down on the bloated coding of today, but an honest appraisal of programming back then would acknowledge that programs were just as buggy as today. People love to program, but they hate to test, and that's been true all along.
That "human" side of computers is one of the reasons I am so against computerized drawings. Why bring all the problems of computing into lottery drawings?
What if the California Lottery discovered that problem on their own? Do you think they would have told anyone? Or would they have quietly fixed the program, and people would have never have known that they had no chance of winning the game?
As computers become more prevalent in drawings, the problems will increase greatly. There are just too many points of failure. So sad that lottery directors are in such a rush towards that big, bad idea.
Wow ! The PET and the VIC-20 -- brings back old memories. You know, for their time, those were darn good machines !
Agree the programs back then were buggy. But one back then didn't release the program chock full of bugs. The programmers used to ask selected users to Beta Test it to discover the bugs. Actually, I had a lot of fun beta-testing. Back then programmers used to often say something like Don't be afraid to hit any combination of keys you want to see if the program crashes. The programmers then realized that the program code wasn't completely smooth on first try. But they also had enough self-respect and also respect for the potential users not to rush it out for use.
And these were utility prgrams, WP programs, etc; not vital programs like an OS ! Seems like every week I'm being informed I have a new security patch to install for WIN XP here. That's really shoddy ! If you have an OS, and basically a monopoly on it, and a browser that is basically a monopoly (since I've run into sites where the pages won't fully recognize any other browser but IE whether I want to use it or not) then gol darn it, don't release it so full of holes ! MS has more than enough financial resources to do it right ; not as if their employees or Bill is/are going to not be able to buy groceries this week if they don't rush it right out there. Perhaps Bill has the wrong people programming.....it seems from the overt evidence that the hackers are better at using his code than his programmers are ! It is just a real sore spot with me.
As to the same shoddy workmanship in the CA lottery...No, if they had discovered this on their own, I certainly don't think they would have mentioned it to the public. Computers for lottery drawings are a terrible idea ! You can already see from thestates using them that there is often nothing "random" about RNG. Right now in fact, I think it is ruining the games...there are some really lousy and weird things happening in the games now ; and they fly against statistics. The proof is in the recent draw histories of the individual games. If I had a Magic Wand I'd make the RNGs disappear.
============
How can you tell if a politician is lying?
Answer: His lips are moving.
