Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots

From: Acme Diagnostics (LFinezapthis_at_partpostmark.net)
Date: 07/11/04 

Date: 11 Jul 2004 02:47:06 -0500

Herman Jurjus <h.jurjus@hetnet.nl> wrote:
>Acme Diagnostics wrote:
>[snip]
> > ... Having written three impossible
>> programs already, I find the discussions about what me and other real
>> programmers can't do highly entertaining. It would be even more
>> entertaining to cross-post some of it to a real programmer group. But
>> I'm not a mean person.
>
>What kind of programs can you be talking about?
>Please do tell; you'd be mean if you didn't,
>now that you mentioned it.
>
>Cheers,
>Herman Jurjus

First, after googling to get an idea of who I'm talking to, just let me
say that I very much enjoy your test posts, especially "Haha, hoho,
hihi". I never met someone who enjoyed testing so much!

Also, any classical pianist is a good guy in my book. My first
classical teacher at age 5 was a Hungarian concert pianist named
Gabriella. She taught me to play scales with eggs on my hands. Can't
remember if there was ever a real egg, but every time I see an egg I
remember Gabriella! After 8 years of that (finally learning to play my
scales sunny side up - hehe!), switched to organ, later became a jazz
organist (but concert piano is of course more difficult) with a brief
stint selling Steinways and getting to play many of them (!!!) My wife,
opera singer and personal DJ, often plays my favorite classical piece,
Faure's In Paradisum, with the not-really triplets on the organ. And I
wait in anticipation for that one cello note to go minor. I can never
get used to it. Such a brilliant one-note understatement-sledge hammer!
(But a lot depends on the band...err..orchestra/recording.)

Anyhoo...!

Note that my above statements imply programs that are only "impossible"
to those who are not "real" programmers, and you'll realize that lots
of programmers could supply a list of "impossible" programs. They are
not really impossible, but only seem so to the uninitiated.

What this translates to: We developers often get the idea to write a
certain program. We promote this idea somewhat, maybe as market testing
and/or for some peer-review of the design. Inevitably, since we think
it's marketable and thus not already done, we only hear how impossible
it is to do that. Anyone can test this. Just think of a program that
you would like to have, but which you can't find. Then go into the
group (incl. email groups) devoted to that subject and announce that
you intend to do it. For instance, go into an anti-spam group and
announce that you will solve the email spam problem for most people.
Then run for cover fast! Because you are going to get flamed all over
the place for saying such a stupid thing! And some of them are
programmers, small p, but others are just experts in the app subject
whatever it is.

BUT! Then go into a real programmer group and ask, "Hey, is it
possible to write a program to do XYZ" then again run for cover!
Because you are going to get flamed all over the place for asking such
a stupid question, but for the reverse reason - anyone can do that!
(given that someone will pay them, of course).

Then, 2 or 5 years later (13/7 of course), you are watching it do that
stupid thing on your desk (and typically a lot more).

I doubt you would still have any interest after this, but if you do,
let me know and I'll describe the 4 impossible programs I've written (I
had forgotten one). But I can only describe them vaguely here because I
would otherwise be identifying myself. I have a very good, legitimate
reason for not doing that having to do with next year's sales forecast.
But *only* because you are a classical pianist and thus obviously
highly trustworthy (!) if you care to email me with an assurance of
non-disclosure, I will be happy to describe them more fully including
an easy way to verify claim #1, and hard ways to verify claims #2 and
#3. Claim #4, the statistical prediction gizmo that beat the
commodities market (2 years 13/7), is too long ago.

Once again, there is no doubt that the Halting Problem is true and
non-trivial in theoretical context. Maybe it is non-trivial in
real-world context too, I simply don't know. I'd bet 10-1 there's a
work-around though. There have been lots of logical impossibilities,
and there has always has been a work-around.

Larry