Expert to Expert: Erik Meijer and Bertrand Meyer - Objects, Contracts, Concurrency, Sleeping BarbersMar 27, 2008 at 1:56 PM
“I don’t use the internet any more because they can steel every thing” in context that was a very funny comment.
Regarding the Sleeping Barber Algorithm and with out breaking the demonstration. Wouldn’t you want to have as many barbers as you have chairs?
The brilliants of making a machine that does polynomial functions is fascinating! I can’t begin to imagine how one goes about making something like that. Even when I see it it’s hard to believe. I admittedly paused just to get a closer look at that human brain.
I to have looked over that edge. It took all the strength I had to scrape my self off of the floor I had been sprawled on for the past 3 days to walk my self into a free clinic. I was extremely dehydrated and had pneumonia. They gave me fluid and strong anti biotic interveinously and let me go. I sat in the waiting room trying to gather enough strength to go home. I recovered. Im greatful to the the doctors, clinicians and nurses who gave me that day, more time.
Hearing about some one who doesn’t go beyond 2 clicks on a computer to find information reminded me of my tepidness to learning how to use a computer as a kid. The current clicking interface just isn’t really how a lot of people like to interface/comunicate. It makes me smile to hear the test subjects don’t see the reason why they would be asking a computer how to find a job or why the information like that would be in a computer but rather they would ask their Nabors for this kind of information. Makes sense to me.
Today I have to click buttons and type in key words to receive a Data retrieval of my query. I ask how far away today’s capabilities from an interface are something like MaxHeadroom, with out the annoying personality. Of course it’s probably even further away from the mains stream use of those who are ilitarate.
MSR you guys are awsome.
=An exceptional segment on persuasion.It’s a skill I could probably use more often, though I have questions surrounding the acquisition, value and use of such a skill.
There is a thought of reason that lends me to believe that the best idea should win out on the merits of the idea alone. It seems to be the case that the use of persuasion does not guarantee or truly promote that the most valiant of solutions is used.You say it took Columbus ten years to persuade the powers at the time to sponsor his endeavors. Ten years is a long time, especially back then when the life expectancy of an individual was shorter than it is today. I wonder if Columbus was a good persuader at all.I am clearly at a disadvantage when all to often some one with not the best idea wins out and continues to win out on the bases of how well that person “smooses”. I have a hard time going out with the boys for beer and chips on the bases that un-adulterated truth should prevail rather than what we perceive to be the strength of natural selection. Knowing full well the reality of the matter, politicking is the source of much movement; I still find it hard to fallow the main stream. I feel I would be taking steps back ward, in order to further my ideas or progression.I refuse to believe (Machiavelli was not a genius) that the end justifies the means. It only means that the individual or party is not smart enough to find solutions reasonable to fit with the end.I believe Columbus was an explorer. =
Jun 18, 2007 at 11:55 AMChadk-i would disagree with your coments. i like the format of these interviews.
What i would think interesting is to hear some phylisophical ideas from people like these who are interviewed in behind the code. you know the kind of ideas, the ones that arent nesisaraly formulated, or fully thought out, the kind of thoughts that if you shared them they might not come out complete, what it is the person thinks of when they are "cooking". the thoughts and ideas it takes to get to making up a formal idea that is then shared. or maybe they are whole ideas, just to radical to think any one would be able tomake scence of them or take them seriously.
On a more serious note, I don't think C9 should go to eccentric and weird. However, I have noticed over the past year that C9 has very very much moved away from being the face of Microsoft, to, I hate to use the word marketing, and I won't, but more towards showcasing products.
I think there needs to be a good balance, but it has been a while since C9 did a totally 'off-topic' sort of video like following Bill Hill around campus.
Just my €0.02
...let the interviewed person talk about their interests, when a nerve gets hit, it doesn’t take much coaching to get some one to open up and talk about what it is they love. Be that WPF or animal tracks in the mud. Every one has a story of where it is they come from and just about every one has a personal interest (often times its reflected in the work they do or ties in to it). I think that’s what is so great about the Bill Hill video, he talked about what he had a passion for and it showed and then he tied it into the work he has done at MS. So my constructive crit would be to let people talk, talk about what they have a passion for. Dig into who they are. I find its the interviews that get in side peoples heads and finding out who they are are the interviews i like the most. (and CH9 has alot of those type of interviews).
The qualities of enthusiasm, inquisitiveness coupled with listening go a long way to making a great interview.
Traits Rory does not seem to lack.
Rather than having ‘more’ intelligent questions be asked like some one said earlier, maybe it’s a matter of fewer questions and more Listening?
Just my €0.02 + Kevin’s €0.02