I think it is a good general principle that, for any process that is likely to be a tempting target for scammers, you should require a non-electronic step to initiate that process. Requiring a physical letter of application for a job, for example.
I seem to remember (but I can't find the source) that Wirth initially had three aims in designing Pascal:
1. To use it in teaching a structure programming course to new students. As in the late 60's all student programming was batch mode (submit your program to an operator to run, and pick up the printout the following day), this meant the compiler had to be single-pass and give good error messages.
2. To use it in teaching a data structures course involving new data structures worked out by Wirth and Hoare.
3. To use it in teaching a compilers course. This meant the compiler code had to be clean and understandable. Being single-pass helped in this.
Sure, but all successful capitalist economies revolve around supporting commercial interests which prop up the tax revenue which then hold up the welfare state and public infrastructure, QoL and freedoms we enjoy.
THe big challenge is separating the good from the bad commercial interests. It's not a challenge because differentiating the good from the harmful is difficult, but because bad actor industries also make A LOT of money that buys a lot of political power and also employ a lot of people, so removing them from economy would have negative economic and political consequences.
Basically it's like a dead man's switch in a mutually assured destruction weapon.
Many years ago (or so it seems now), I was turned on to slime moulds by the photos of Kim Fleming on Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/myriorama/albums/1271006/). The undersides of logs can be a good place to find them.
I’ve occasionally found them, but only when their color contrasts with the background during walks. Can they be found year round? Do they have a preference for logs?
The Grothendieck method can be applied to implementing a new feature in a software system. You just refactor the existing code until the implementation of the new feature becomes trivial.
When reading code you don't really understand, that approach looks a lot like magic. I have a few code bases I try to follow, one is a large Java application, and some of the features added seemingly come out of nowhere. The commit message will just say "Add support for XYZ" and then a few lines added to seemingly random files to setup of condition and then the feature manifests itself.
In 'Managing Technical People', 1997, page 199, Watts Humphrey says that, after several failed attempts to produce a PC by IBM procedures, they set up an independent team that could skip the procedures as necessary to get the job done. This worked in the short term but it had two side-effects that were catastrophic in the long term: they lost control of the operating system to Microsoft, and they also lost control of the chips to Intel. He says both of these side-effects would have been caught by the checks inherent in the normal IBM procedures.
They might have caught the mistakes but I think the resulting product would have been a flop.
If IBM hadn't done what it did somebody else would have dominated the market with a product to fit the same niche. Perhaps somebody "downmarket" in the more consumer space who managed to punch upwards -- maybe Apple who had some business success with the Apple II + VisiCalc, etc. or maybe Kaypro or somebody in the CP/M space. Or perhaps somebody else "upmarket" like DEC, who came too late the personal computer space with products that nobody really bought (DEC Rainbow, etc) but maybe they'd have had more success if IBM hadn't gotten in there.
The market wanted a relatively open product to innovate in. When the PS/2 came along a few years later with proprietary bus, etc and tried to put the genie back in the bottle, it flopped.
One of my favorite scenes from Pirates of Silicon Valley is when Steve Ballmer (played by John DiMaggio, yes, the voice of Bender) narrates an audience aside, positively giddy with Ballmer glee at how his clever friend Bill put one over on those stodgy fellows from IBM and got them to give away the golden goose. It was like harpooning the great white whale. While it was a telefilm and thus a fictionalization, near as I can tell things happened pretty much as described.
I have been in similar meetings a couple times, when the client didn't really understand the long-term ramifications of they game plan - and we did. Of course, we weren't as fortunate as Microsoft, but on one instance I remember clearly - and where I made remarks privately as we left the building - the client was more or less forced to acquire, for a unreasoinably high amount, the tiny vendor a couple years down the line.
I recently came to realise that my memories of my experiences of early childhood are probably greatly affected by seeing my younger siblings going through those same experiences a few years later. At age five or six I would see my mother reading to them on the sofa and they would be lying with their heads on her tummy feeling her warmth and listening to her heartbeat and stomach gurgles. Seeing this would remind me of when I used to do that, thus reinforcing those memories and probably somewhat distorting them. One of the distortions is that this memory is set in the house we moved to when I was four, and most of my own relevant experiences would have been set in our previous house. I think the accumulation of memories is a bit like training an LLM on a combination of new data and its own data.
It always pleases me to see pictures of NGC 4216, the edge-on spiral galaxy with a star beside its nucleus. I used to use it as a pointer to the short-period contact binary star CC Comae Berenices back when I used observe eclipsing binaries with my Celestron 8.
reply