Philosophy

I have started a blog about philosophy because when I am programming I come up with things and I want to write them down somewhere so I decided to start a blog you can find it here:

http://programming-philosophy.blogspot.com

If someone wants to post on it too just pm me ;)/>

Great, but the page is not 100% in English.

Sorry had wrong link fixed now

Responding to your philosphy on why we have multiple programming languages
I disagree on the fact it's because people get more "praise"
What I believe is beause each programming language, is designed to suit a specific need. Like C++ would be used for GUI making, not that especially easy to use by extremly powerful, whereas Java being an easier programming langauge to learn, isn't as powerful as C++ and isn't as effecient as it. Every single programming language has ups and downs. Lua is designed for simple scripting, things that don't require anything to be complex and no need to directly communicate to hardware components, thus making it eaiser to use. What I believe the main reason why hard languages are "hard", is because they're so powerful, and something so powerful requires a lot skill to be used.

Also in response to our current society:
Sadly, our current society isn't perfect. Should be a known fact to everybody in the world. Why? It's because we're humans. Human nature's and unique behavour that we have as lifeforms, is what causes our society today. Our greediness and selfishness. Why do these people exist? Well, it's because these people are human. In fact, people who are poor doesn't mean that they're not greedy or selfish, they could still be greedy and selfish. Infact, some people become poor because of their greediness and selfishness. If I were to ask everybody in the world, if I gave you a hundred thousand dollars, would you keep it to yourself, or give it to poor people and leave you with nothing. Most of the people (That includes me and probably you too) would say that they would rather keep it. How can we stop this? We really can't. It's human nature. The world is a horrible corrupted place, live with it. It's been like this for the beginning of time. The reaosn why this is we are greedy in the first place? It's how we survive. Our brain tells us we "need" all of this and "want" all of this, because in order to survive in very tough situations, at times we can't spare for others, but sadly this carries on today to greedy people. It's also because how we humans adapt so quickly. When we get more money, or less money, we adapt eventually to it. That's why poor people don't constantly jump of bridges committing suicide, they get used to it. From your perspective, you would think it would be like hell living in such a situation, well if got there slowly, and adapted to it, it won't be. This also applies when we receive wealth, we adapt to it and no longer feel happy about it, demanding more. That's the roots on how I believe selfishness and greediness came from.

Oh and, I believe that before these times, even further back, people were just as selfish as they are today.

1lann, on 19 March 2013 - 11:39 PM said:

Responding to your philosphy on why we have multiple programming languages
I disagree on the fact it's because people get more "praise"
What I believe is beause each programming language, is designed to suit a specific need. Like C++ would be used for GUI making, not that especially easy to use by extremly powerful, whereas Java being an easier programming langauge to learn, isn't as powerful as C++ and isn't as effecient as it. Every single programming language has ups and downs. Lua is designed for simple scripting, things that don't require anything to be complex and no need to directly communicate to hardware components, thus making it eaiser to use. What I believe the main reason why hard languages are "hard", is because they're so powerful, and something so powerful requires a lot skill to be used.

It's of course only what I think. I like to discuss about it. I also completely agree with you. But I think we're both correct.

1lann, on 19 March 2013 - 11:39 PM said:

Also in response to our current society:
Sadly, our current society isn't perfect. Should be a known fact to everybody in the world. Why? It's because we're humans. Human nature's and unique behavour that we have as lifeforms, is what causes our society today. Our greediness and selfishness. Why do these people exist? Well, it's because these people are human. In fact, people who are poor doesn't mean that they're not greedy or selfish, they could still be greedy and selfish. Infact, some people become poor because of their greediness and selfishness. If I were to ask everybody in the world, if I gave you a hundred thousand dollars, would you keep it to yourself, or give it to poor people and leave you with nothing. Most of the people (That includes me and probably you too) would say that they would rather keep it. How can we stop this? We really can't. It's human nature. The world is a horrible corrupted place, live with it. It's been like this for the beginning of time. The reaosn why this is we are greedy in the first place? It's how we survive. Our brain tells us we "need" all of this and "want" all of this, because in order to survive in very tough situations, at times we can't spare for others, but sadly this carries on today to greedy people. It's also because how we humans adapt so quickly. When we get more money, or less money, we adapt eventually to it. That's why poor people don't constantly jump of bridges committing suicide, they get used to it. From your perspective, you would think it would be like hell living in such a situation, well if got there slowly, and adapted to it, it won't be. This also applies when we receive wealth, we adapt to it and no longer feel happy about it, demanding more. That's the roots on how I believe selfishness and greediness came from.

Oh and, I believe that before these times, even further back, people were just as selfish as they are today.

I completely agree with you.

Actually you're both right, but you are talking about different "regions" of scripting languages..
If you are comparing the big boys like C++ and Java, they are different because they have different purposes as 1lann stated.. (this is done furthermore in languages like runescript and robloxlua
But if you look at languages like lolspeak or random hobby projects that introduce new languages.. Yeah thats where axander is right..

Btw I have random ideas like that all the time when im at work.. xD They are not related to scripting, more to physics and how nature works, but I might post some ideas here later..

ikke009, on 20 March 2013 - 12:00 AM said:

Actually you're both right, but you are talking about different "regions" of scripting languages..
If you are comparing the big boys like C++ and Java, they are different because they have different purposes as 1lann stated.. (this is done furthermore in languages like runescript and robloxlua
But if you look at languages like lolspeak or random hobby projects that introduce new languages.. Yeah thats where axander is right..

Btw I have random ideas like that all the time when im at work.. xD They are not related to scripting, more to physics and how nature works, but I might post some ideas here later..

If you want I can add you as an author on blogger.
Or you can pm them and I will post them.

o.o
verry random, but why?

Because sometimes you just want a place where you can post your random strays of thought..

So I was thinking, light of all wavelenghts travel at the same linear speed, and we call them different names (or colors, lets focus on colors) depending on their exact wavelength. But how can we percieve the linear distance between the upper and lower limit of the wave's amplitude? I like to see it as thusly: light of different wavelenghts travel with different netto speeds (light with smaller wavelenghts travel faster because they move up and down more), and we distinguish these colours based on their speed of impact rather then wavelength..
Now I dont know if this is true (I know light of different wavelenths travel at different speeds, but I don't know if this is different liniar or netto speed), im no expert on this xD but assuming it is, would everything appear redder to us if time were to slow down slightly?

ikke009, on 20 March 2013 - 03:57 AM said:

Because sometimes you just want a place where you can post your random strays of thought..

So I was thinking, light of all wavelenghts travel at the same linear speed, and we call them different names (or colors, lets focus on colors) depending on their exact wavelength. But how can we percieve the linear distance between the upper and lower limit of the wave's amplitude? I like to see it as thusly: light of different wavelenghts travel with different netto speeds (light with smaller wavelenghts travel faster because they move up and down more), and we distinguish these colours based on their speed of impact rather then wavelength..
Now I dont know if this is true (I know light of different wavelenths travel at different speeds, but I don't know if this is different liniar or netto speed), im no expert on this xD but assuming it is, would everything appear redder to us if time were to slow down slightly?

I don't think time affects the wavelength of light, but there's this game which you have to collect these balls while the speed of light gets slower and slower http://gamelab.mit.e...speed-of-light/ Though according to this video, the further light travels way and moves, the redder it becomes until it's infrared:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxJ4M7tyLRE[/media]

The fact that light becomes redder if it moves further away is due to doppler effect on atomic (or photonic in this case) scale though, so its not really relevant.

Regarding the latest post about selfishness, I disagree. Some people have fantastic things while others have nothing is because the people with fantastic things chose to work for them. I know some people may not be able to work for things, or just haven't been presented with as greater opportunities as others, but most people who have millions of dollars have worked extremely hard their entire lives to get to where they are. To call them selfish for all their hard work and effort I think is not fair at all.

Not only hard work, but also (mostly actually) determination. (as explained in "Think and grow rich", one of the easiest to read philosophy books I've seen)
Also I like to see selfishness as something relative.. Since people call others selfish because they give less away then others, or so they make themselves believe; which is something I find selfish to begin with..

1lann, on 20 March 2013 - 11:16 PM said:

I don't think time affects the wavelength of light, but there's this game which you have to collect these balls while the speed of light gets slower and slower http://gamelab.mit.e...speed-of-light/ Though according to this video, the further light travels way and moves, the redder it becomes until it's infrared:

arent cameras sensitive to infrared?
why can they see those distant stars then?

English is fuzzy in this area, but there's an important distinction to be made between wanting things for yourself and wanting what belongs to others, both of which just get lumped into selfishness. Certainly, there are rich who got rich through legal, or at least quasi-legal, forms of theft, and that's something everyone should stand up against, but there are also rich people to got rich through hard work and determination, by making things, or offering services, that were good, and that many other people were quite happy to pay them for. The former are parasites and modern thugs, and we should use every weapon in our arsenal - boycots, protest, and legislative actions - to tear them down. The latter, though, are absolutely essential to modern civilization. Without them, we will never conquer the challenges of keeping this civilization going.

Of course, the former type are the ones who live and die by lobbyists. When your entire business model is "get people's money by any means necessary," your business absolutely depends on someone running legal defense - and so you get companies spending billions lobbying politicians to ensure no laws change that would hamper them. And hey, while they're at it, why not just get the government to take people's money directly and give it to them? After all, these companies don't care where their money comes from, so long as they get money.

Most people have probably daydreamed about running a company, about some products or services you feel passionate about, and think you could make better, if you had the opportunity. Almost nobody thinks "Man, I wish I ran a megacorp so I could have lobbyists make the government pass laws that impede foreign competition, giving me free reign of the market, and if things go wrong, pass bail-out bills so I don't even have to pay the tab when my half-assed and short-sighted policies inevitibly screw my company over." And yet somehow people assume that people who run businesses are some different species, who all think this way. They don't. Some to, yes, but they are a minority. An increasingly successful minority, because corrpution in government has continued to spiral out of control, giving them a clear advantage over other businesses who think in terms of succeeding by making their products and services better and cheaper, but nonetheless, still a minority, at least at present.

</rant>

ikke009, on 21 March 2013 - 01:38 AM said:

The fact that light becomes redder if it moves further away is due to doppler effect on atomic (or photonic in this case) scale though, so its not really relevant.

True that, but I don't think Time has the same effect, since everything is relative around it.

On the point of selfishness:
Have you heard of the prisoners dilemma? if not, look it up. Anyway, some people modified that game to make it a little more life-like (added reputation to people, and favors and such. Also, I think the winner passed on their choice of what they did onto the next round). Then they ran it thousands of times. In the beginning, people were selfish and only though of themselves, and sold out the other guy. But, as time went on, people became nicer. They started working together. The "perfect" way to play The Prisoner's Dilemma is called "Tit-for-Tat". Basically, you do whatever the other guy did in the previous turn. As the modified version went on, however, a new thing came. There started doing what the maker called "generous Tit-for-Tat" (remember this is all just code doing random stuff). They would do what the last guy did, but could forgive and forget if they were bad some times. Of course, when it was doing this, there would be big lapses when they became selfish again, as when everyone is kind, they all become suckers. But, again, it would slowly come back to this "Generous Tit-for-Tat".
The moral of this, is that humans are not greedy and selfish, we simply try to survive. This sometimes means we can be selfish, but if it can serve us to work together, we will do that.

On the point of light:
Light travels at the same speed, regardless of wavelength. The reason we see red in the sunset isn't because it is faster, but has a larger wave. There are also more particles that the light has to travel through to reach us at sunset. Thus, the shorter wavelengths of light hit stuff, and don't make it, leaving the red. This is related to the doppler effect, with red-shifts and blue-shifts (for light in stars, different for sounds), but I don't know exactly what happens there, I just know its something to do with the larger or shorter wavelengths.

Edit: Wait, I think I remember now. If a star red-shifts, it is going away, because there are more particles in the way, screening out the blue. When it blue-Shifts, it is coming closer, because there are less things screening out the blue, so it stays in.