For the coders out there, you may be familiar with C#, and how it includes "get" and "set" functions. I was thinking there should be a third function called "compare". Many times in code, I need to know if a value matches what an object has in a property. Rather than using "get" and writing extraneous code over and over, why not a simple "compare"?
Example:
tempvar = object.property.get()
if (tempvar = comparevar) ...
if (object.property.compare(comparevar)) ...
It probably gets more complicated than that, but you get the idea
2008-12-01
IDEA: Simpler interconnectivity for easier communication
It occurred to me that half of the mess of development of technology has to do with interfacing with legacy or proprietary systems. In light of this, I think it would be optimal for everyone to come to a consensus on what is the more efficient way to communicate (a la World Wide Web Consortium), and everyone develop around that. Legacy and proprietary interfaces would come at a premium to work with.
Some parts of this have already come to fruition, including XML.
Some parts of this have already come to fruition, including XML.
IDEA: Humans as brain cells
Let me quickly guide you through my thinking before I start in. I was pondering Leonardo da Vinci, and how he created while cutoff from outside influences(1). Then I moved forward to today, where the Internet connects a lot of the world (if not most). Yet innovation proceeds, almost at an equal pace with da Vinci.
That's when I thought of something. What if humans with a connection to each other could mimic a human brain? Imagine a brain as diverse as or more diverse than our own. This might be the next leap in evolution.
(1) I don't know if he was actually mostly cut off from outside influences; I have yet to do actual research. My sources are Wikipedia and a video game with a rendering of one of his studios.
That's when I thought of something. What if humans with a connection to each other could mimic a human brain? Imagine a brain as diverse as or more diverse than our own. This might be the next leap in evolution.
(1) I don't know if he was actually mostly cut off from outside influences; I have yet to do actual research. My sources are Wikipedia and a video game with a rendering of one of his studios.
2008-11-06
CODING: Modular coding techniques
Totally unnecessary disclaimer: I do not claim to be any kind of authority when it comes to programming. The following are just observations.
For more modular coding, I would like to mention two techniques.
First: code for unit testing. This means to write your methods in such a way that it is easy to test each method in an "offline" setting to make sure the method produces expected values given certain input. In this way, if you make changes to the method, you can test the method before and after to make sure the output is the same for both instances.
The trick in this case is to develop methods so that they do indeed work offline. For example. I was just editing a method that creates a SQL query using arguments passed to the method, executes the query, then returns the results. For unit testing, the part where the query is build should be in its own method (separated from the database part), so that you can test it with input when you change the method of building the query.
Second: modularize everything (sorry for making a verb by adding "ize"). Every part of an application should be modularized so that changing one part does not require changing other parts. For example, I have an application that accepts input from an excel spreadsheet and produces PHP code. However, many methods in the application contribute to the final output. What I should do is have all of those methods call a common output method, and have that write to the final output. In this way, if I decide to output in different mediums, I only have to change the output method, rather than the multiple methods.
For more modular coding, I would like to mention two techniques.
First: code for unit testing. This means to write your methods in such a way that it is easy to test each method in an "offline" setting to make sure the method produces expected values given certain input. In this way, if you make changes to the method, you can test the method before and after to make sure the output is the same for both instances.
The trick in this case is to develop methods so that they do indeed work offline. For example. I was just editing a method that creates a SQL query using arguments passed to the method, executes the query, then returns the results. For unit testing, the part where the query is build should be in its own method (separated from the database part), so that you can test it with input when you change the method of building the query.
Second: modularize everything (sorry for making a verb by adding "ize"). Every part of an application should be modularized so that changing one part does not require changing other parts. For example, I have an application that accepts input from an excel spreadsheet and produces PHP code. However, many methods in the application contribute to the final output. What I should do is have all of those methods call a common output method, and have that write to the final output. In this way, if I decide to output in different mediums, I only have to change the output method, rather than the multiple methods.
2008-10-22
IDEA: From Desktop to PMP
I think in the whirlpool of mobile computing, we're missing the big picture of what the desired goal is, so I'll map it out.
- Desktop for home computing and organization.
- Laptop for mobile computing and organization.
- PDA for mobile organization.
- Phone for communication.
- Mobile phone for mobile communication.
- Media playing software for home entertainment.
- Portable media player for mobile entertainment.
My idea is that as we go from home to mobile, we should be able to carry our data and preferences with us. An example of the implementation of my idea is the following: when moving from desktop to laptop, there is some common bridge that allows us to transfer our computer preferences and necessary files over to the laptop with no fuss or muss.
Taken a step further, the desktop and laptop could be combined into one, and the PDA, phone, and media player could also be combined into one. In this scenario, I envision two docking devices. The dock has the big hardware that drives the more powerful requirements needed at home, while the detatchable mobile parts carry the preferences, data, and necessary mobile applications to manipulate those items. When changes are made to any one device, it transfers to the rest of the devices upon docking. You could even have a single dock at home that has a detatchable laptop and mobile device.
Going even further, a degree of customization for shells is possible for the mobile devices.
This all loops back to my underlying premise of allowing the user as much control over their environment as possible, rather than being locked in to the company's software interface.
See also http://www.modumobile.com
- Desktop for home computing and organization.
- Laptop for mobile computing and organization.
- PDA for mobile organization.
- Phone for communication.
- Mobile phone for mobile communication.
- Media playing software for home entertainment.
- Portable media player for mobile entertainment.
My idea is that as we go from home to mobile, we should be able to carry our data and preferences with us. An example of the implementation of my idea is the following: when moving from desktop to laptop, there is some common bridge that allows us to transfer our computer preferences and necessary files over to the laptop with no fuss or muss.
Taken a step further, the desktop and laptop could be combined into one, and the PDA, phone, and media player could also be combined into one. In this scenario, I envision two docking devices. The dock has the big hardware that drives the more powerful requirements needed at home, while the detatchable mobile parts carry the preferences, data, and necessary mobile applications to manipulate those items. When changes are made to any one device, it transfers to the rest of the devices upon docking. You could even have a single dock at home that has a detatchable laptop and mobile device.
Going even further, a degree of customization for shells is possible for the mobile devices.
This all loops back to my underlying premise of allowing the user as much control over their environment as possible, rather than being locked in to the company's software interface.
See also http://www.modumobile.com
2008-10-21
IDEA: Programming consolidation through primitive AI
[Neo] AI? You mean Artificial Intelligence?
[Morpheus] No, I mean Angsty Incompetent. You're a f***ing geek and you have to ask what AI means? Here's the blue pill, get the f*** outta here.
Ahem.
The idea is that a primitive AI system could simplify a lot of programming required of hardware systems. It's similar to teaching a pet to do a trick. You show the desired result, and the primitive intelligence learns. You could teach a visual identification system to allow a certain person in, and their built-in facial recognition software and hardware takes care of the rest.
This builds on another theory of mine: programs are essentially beings of primitive intelligence. I saw a bird circling over the same spot, and imagined it similar to an anti-burglar sensor. It takes a snapshot of the area, and if anything changes, act upon that change.
To expand a bit, the AI would require the needed hardware and software to observe objects as desired. Going back to the visual identification system example, it would first need the proper hardware and software required to make distinctions between faces. Once this is accomplished, then the learning may take place.
[Morpheus] No, I mean Angsty Incompetent. You're a f***ing geek and you have to ask what AI means? Here's the blue pill, get the f*** outta here.
Ahem.
The idea is that a primitive AI system could simplify a lot of programming required of hardware systems. It's similar to teaching a pet to do a trick. You show the desired result, and the primitive intelligence learns. You could teach a visual identification system to allow a certain person in, and their built-in facial recognition software and hardware takes care of the rest.
This builds on another theory of mine: programs are essentially beings of primitive intelligence. I saw a bird circling over the same spot, and imagined it similar to an anti-burglar sensor. It takes a snapshot of the area, and if anything changes, act upon that change.
To expand a bit, the AI would require the needed hardware and software to observe objects as desired. Going back to the visual identification system example, it would first need the proper hardware and software required to make distinctions between faces. Once this is accomplished, then the learning may take place.
IDEA: Simple vs. complex processes
The idea running through my head is that I may, at some point, release software to the public that a company I work for deems as their own property. This brings up the idea regarding copyrighting and/or patenting software, which extends into the idea of copyrighting and/or patenting a simple idea.
Consider the following situations:
- Two people write books about a wizard that comes of age and defeats a wizard seeking a legendary "Philosopher's Stone". One writes a story that is marginally interesting and acquires little notice. The other story is written by J. K. Rowling.
- A coder writes a piece of code that is determined to be very useful. The company he is working for uses this code extensively, and it is a central part of their product. Said coder releases this code to the world in a package that in no way reflects the company product. Said company claims the coder violated a non-disclosure agreement, and is liable for damage in an attempt to thwart a copyright or patent on the software.
- You eat a bowl of cereal by pouring cereal into a bowl, pouring in some milk, then using a spoon to eat it. Then someone patents this process, and demands money in some way to compensate for use of their proprietary process
You see how silly this gets?
The worst part is that it is hard to determine the dividing line between a "commonly reachable" idea, and one that has a unique structure that should be protected. With human language, complexity increases with each word used. With constructs, the "parts" tend to be much larger, and therefore do not constitute a "complex" object until the object becomes quite large.
Food for thought.
Consider the following situations:
- Two people write books about a wizard that comes of age and defeats a wizard seeking a legendary "Philosopher's Stone". One writes a story that is marginally interesting and acquires little notice. The other story is written by J. K. Rowling.
- A coder writes a piece of code that is determined to be very useful. The company he is working for uses this code extensively, and it is a central part of their product. Said coder releases this code to the world in a package that in no way reflects the company product. Said company claims the coder violated a non-disclosure agreement, and is liable for damage in an attempt to thwart a copyright or patent on the software.
- You eat a bowl of cereal by pouring cereal into a bowl, pouring in some milk, then using a spoon to eat it. Then someone patents this process, and demands money in some way to compensate for use of their proprietary process
You see how silly this gets?
The worst part is that it is hard to determine the dividing line between a "commonly reachable" idea, and one that has a unique structure that should be protected. With human language, complexity increases with each word used. With constructs, the "parts" tend to be much larger, and therefore do not constitute a "complex" object until the object becomes quite large.
Food for thought.
MISSING: Try-before-you-buy stores
This is my first entry in the MISSING category, and it encompasses any kind of try-before-you-buy store. Here are the most prominent categories:
- video games (more specifically the games themselves, not the systems
- headphones
- "consumer electronics" (e.g. mp3 player)
I understand that it's likely you can ask a sales associate to demonstrate some of these, but that's a lot of hassle for something you may not buy, and then you have to deal with the social pressure of having the salesperson right in front of you to refuse.
I'm the kind of shopper that wants to be left alone. If I have a pressing question, then I will seek out assistance. Therefore, I'm very interested in having the ability to try things like these before buying them.
- video games (more specifically the games themselves, not the systems
- headphones
- "consumer electronics" (e.g. mp3 player)
I understand that it's likely you can ask a sales associate to demonstrate some of these, but that's a lot of hassle for something you may not buy, and then you have to deal with the social pressure of having the salesperson right in front of you to refuse.
I'm the kind of shopper that wants to be left alone. If I have a pressing question, then I will seek out assistance. Therefore, I'm very interested in having the ability to try things like these before buying them.
CODING: Getting computers to understand human speech
One bit of coding I have in mind to develop (public license of course) is a kind of language interpreter.
The premise: why can't we tell our computers what to do instead of moving around a mouse and typing on a keyboard?
As far as simple sentences go, it shouldn't be hard. The only difficult piece will be code that converts spoken words to text that the computer can parse, e.g. ANSI (or ASCII?)
After that, it comes down to linguistic rules. Here is an example, using two languages to show versatility.
Rule for identifying the weekday:
English:
Japanese:
Rule for {weekday} (with a pipe "|" indiciating "or"):
Rule for {sunday}:
English:
Japanese:
Same for the other days of the week.
For possible mis-translations, the pattern would be something like this:
When the rule matches something said by the user, you could use logic like the following:
And it would follow for the rest of the weekdays.
This somewhat mimics human memory recall. If a person asked what day it was, upon hearing an answer, their mind would search through their memory for things to remember on that particular day.
The premise: why can't we tell our computers what to do instead of moving around a mouse and typing on a keyboard?
As far as simple sentences go, it shouldn't be hard. The only difficult piece will be code that converts spoken words to text that the computer can parse, e.g. ANSI (or ASCII?)
After that, it comes down to linguistic rules. Here is an example, using two languages to show versatility.
Rule for identifying the weekday:
English:
"Today is {weekday}"Japanese:
"Kyou wa {weekday} desu"Rule for {weekday} (with a pipe "|" indiciating "or"):
"{sunday}|{monday}|..."
Rule for {sunday}:
English:
"sunday"Japanese:
"nichiyoubi"Same for the other days of the week.
For possible mis-translations, the pattern would be something like this:
"sunday|(sunny day)|..."
When the rule matches something said by the user, you could use logic like the following:
if ({Today rule hit})
if ({weekday} = {sunday})
{code for sunday}
And it would follow for the rest of the weekdays.
This somewhat mimics human memory recall. If a person asked what day it was, upon hearing an answer, their mind would search through their memory for things to remember on that particular day.
2008-08-20
USER FRIENDLY: Make ALL non-critical dialog boxes optional
Just a quick comment after being "warned" by Excel about something for the umpteenth time, it would be great to have non-critical dialog boxes be optional.
For implementation, when the warning comes up the first time, have a checkbox to indicate that it should/should not be shown the next time. To turn a dialog box back on, the options would have a list of possible dialog box messages, with a help link to show what the popup looks like.
I realize there could be an issue where a person remembers where a popup was, but not what it said, and that searching through a large list for the message would be difficult. Just wanted to relate the idea
For implementation, when the warning comes up the first time, have a checkbox to indicate that it should/should not be shown the next time. To turn a dialog box back on, the options would have a list of possible dialog box messages, with a help link to show what the popup looks like.
I realize there could be an issue where a person remembers where a popup was, but not what it said, and that searching through a large list for the message would be difficult. Just wanted to relate the idea
2008-04-24
IDEA: Teaching web sites how to ask for information
Quick idea, since I'm at work and supposed to be "working". Also, this is kind of more than a concept than a well-thought-out plan.
The idea is this: rather than spending time coding web site forms and the server code to process the information, is it a better idea to "teach" the server how to ask for information in a general sense?
For example, you teach the server how to ask for a simple text answer, like a name. Then you tell the server "OK, I need some text answers from the user, with the labels "Name", "Address" and "Email". Then the server takes that information, and handles everything by itself. No need to code HTML forms or write code to process the information once submitted.
As I said, I haven't had time to flesh out the details, but I'm hoping it would make things easier. For those in the industry, it's similar to how phpMyAdmin seems to work (for all I know, it doesn't teach the server anything), just in a more user-friendly format.
The idea is this: rather than spending time coding web site forms and the server code to process the information, is it a better idea to "teach" the server how to ask for information in a general sense?
For example, you teach the server how to ask for a simple text answer, like a name. Then you tell the server "OK, I need some text answers from the user, with the labels "Name", "Address" and "Email". Then the server takes that information, and handles everything by itself. No need to code HTML forms or write code to process the information once submitted.
As I said, I haven't had time to flesh out the details, but I'm hoping it would make things easier. For those in the industry, it's similar to how phpMyAdmin seems to work (for all I know, it doesn't teach the server anything), just in a more user-friendly format.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)