Life Codecs Ruminations. Reflections. Refractions. Code.

November 13, 2010


Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — Kamal Advani @ 19:33

And here we have scientific proof that lolcats‘ depiction of cats who plot and manipulate is indeed true, not some figment of the human imagination! Ah, Pepo, you devil you. As I was once told by ruby2shoes (and as the intertubes says so too, it must be true), “dogs have owners, cats have staff”.

In other news, we also have scientific proof that “cats know more about fluid mechanics than dogs“!

Wonder what we’ll find out next… stay tuned for the rise of the lolcats.

February 7, 2010


Filed under: general — Tags: — Kamal Advani @ 16:54

Many aeons ago I was introduced to icanhascheezburger (aka lolcats) (by ruby2shoes, who commented here). For those of you who have just joined the interwebz (or can be as ignorant as I for non-technical fun stuff), lolcats is a user-contributed compendium of pictures (and videos – thankfully a lot more pictures!) that display the majestic creatures we know as cats in an amusing, majestic light, doing what they do best – sneer at humans (or hoominz in lolspeak) and dogs :P. Fun stuff!

Anyway, I have decided to bookmark my favourite entries – been doing so intermittently, if you’re feeling particularly bored, visit my lolcats tagged items.

Enjoy! :P

August 12, 2009

On speaking out of one’s posterior…

Filed under: general,philosophy,software dev — Tags: , — Kamal Advani @ 01:30

Warning: Colourful language ahead. (My colours are way duller than most though, so your mileage may vary.)

Every now and then I have episodes of deep reflection on languages and semantics, and not just programming languages either. A common phrase for one speaking junk or bullshit is to ‘speak out of one’s @$$/arse/{insert other posterior synonym} (henceforth aliased to the less-accurate-but-will-do term $POSTERIOR in the interest of the DRY principle)’, or ‘did you just pull that out of your $POSTERIOR’, and so on. In my ever so humble view, these phrases and their variations should be used rather carefully and I am not simply looking at it from the viewpoint of manners and aesthetics either. Let’s consider a few comparisons:

The excretory organs, including parts involved in the aforementioned $POSTERIOR expel toxins and unused junk out of the body, ensuring normal functioning of the digestive system, and in fact the body as a whole all things considered – you are what you eat and all that. In many cases, when one speaks out of one’s $POSTERIOR, it is often a trait that is repeated, because one is still evolving, as we all are, or perhaps has chosen not to evolve – also a choice made by many. Neither good nor bad; it just is, no judgement (no, really). The point is that more often than not, this wannabe-$POSTERIOR produce is not expelled for good, rather its source is often more like a bottomless pit (no pun intended.. well maybe just a little).

An astute reader (like yours truly, who just thought of this, teehee) will also bring up that even in the case of the true $POSTERIOR, it can be a bottomless pit – for one keeps eating and recycling, more so if the intake is … excessive – but the crucial invariant here is that output is always less than or equal to input (in fact equal is quite unlikely I think?) for true $POSTERIOR. Contrast this with case of speech or ideas ejected from wannabe-$POSTERIOR: even without additional intake (i.e. no new incoming less-than-valuable ideas to process), the junky output is sometimes reduced, often remains constant, but usually increases. On the rare occasion, it is eliminated. Quite a different invariant, yes?

Hence these phrases make use of flawed comparisons, i.e. wannabe-$POSTERIOR <> true-$POSTERIOR, they are not even all that similar.

These phrases in fact do a disservice to the true $POSTERIOR. They give $POSTERIOR a bad name. The $POSTERIOR works in all ernest supporting life. It is a Divine gift (have you considered life without it?). The bullshit output via the wannabe-$POSTERIOR, on the other hand, quite simply, does not necessarily do the same.

I shall however submit that the outputs (wannabe-output vs true-output) share many more traits, and are worthy of comparison. But let us not discredit true $POSTERIOR unnecessarily.

Please consider the ideas put forward in this post the next time you decide to use phrases involving $POSTERIOR.

Thank you. I wish you, and your $POSTERIOR, fragrances of heavenly descent.

PS. I have also tagged this as software_dev, for I think they kinda explain invariants and DRY rather nicely.

May 21, 2009

Hitler’s attempt at Agile Development

Filed under: software dev — Tags: , — Kamal Advani @ 23:08

My friend Tom – who does not have a web presence unfortunately (hint hint, Tom) – sent this video link. It is one of the funniest things I’ve seen in a while, top-grade geek humour :-). Note the last sentence in the video. Classic!

Disclaimer: In case this gives the wrong impression – I am a fan of Agile methods, the emphasis on getting quality, well-tested code up and running is breath of fresh air; it takes a certain amount of discipline and culture though – the latter being more crucial in my view, and not always available. Humour like this really brings that much-spoken-about Real World™ to light :P.

April 25, 2009

Humorous Comments on Adobe’s PSD Format

Filed under: software dev — Tags: , , — Kamal Advani @ 06:02

Travis (of Cute Peas fame) sent me this link. That’s what you call a first-class rant :-).

March 11, 2009


Filed under: general,gripe — Tags: , , , — Kamal Advani @ 17:42

Disclaimer: Firstly, this is partly tongue-in-cheek (but only partly), and secondly I don’t think all consultancies are like this, there are definitely better companies out there, I’ve certainly worked in one. On to the content…

Michael posted a link to a news on Superpartners tech revamp on Facebook, which is expected to cost 70 million dollars (!). The news speaks of a company called CSC who’s secured a chunk of the SI work. Anyway, this post has nothing to do with CSC (so please keep your lawyers on a leash) – but it brought us to the topic of consultancies (ya know, mind associations, boredom, that kinda thing). Since Mike seg-faulted reading my long comment (how rude), I may just delete it – but I rather liked my comment, so thought I’d reproduce it here before dust turns to dust.. or comment to.. bit dust.. whatever.

The background conversation here is that moving jobs from one bad consultancy to another may just entail the same thing, my comment:

Scary ain’t it.

In terms of code it’s like someone defined a few marker interfaces: ICrap and ILateHours. The base class AbstractConsultancy implemented them, and added more of its own inner painful classes (e.g. AnalysisParalysis and AllPainNoGainStakeholderMeeting).

Then the various consultancy startup entrepreneurs created their own Consultancy classes extending AbstractConsultancy (for much of the work was done there), but also implementing IPersonalisedCrapAndLateHours to add their own distinct flavour. Oh then obviously they instantiated the Consultancy.

I’d link to a UML class diagram, but this sore throat exacerbates my inertia. Please use your imagination skills, guys and gals.

Yours truly in sarcasm,

Ah, my space, my comment.

– Kamal

Powered by WordPress