I have no idea why comment editing has returned… — 16 Comments
Whistleblower?
I hear they can get a lot done.
Back when Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative was being debated, one of the arguments against this system was that, the computer code that would be needed for this system to work would have to be a million or more lines long, and that that level of complexity—and its working correctly—was an impossibility.
This, when there were probably still some of those humongous old IBM computers that used tape drives, and had to be housed in specially cooled environments, still at work somewhere.
Flash forward to today, when the cellphones we all use work because they are using a lot more than a million lines of code, and have a lot more in the way of capability than of one of those old monstrous IBM tape drive units, and reportedly far more than all the primitive computer capability of the space ships that landed the first men on the moon.
My point here is that it is true that, today, we are dealing with many millions upon millions of lines of computer code, not to mention the different kinds of hardware and operating systems, and the connections between them—satellites, landlines, microwave towers, undersea cables—that all have to interact with each other, and to mesh together for things to function correctly.
Given such manifold complexity, losing the “Edit” function or it appearing and disappearing should not be that much of a surprise, nor should it be a surprise that you can’t really figure out why, or make a permanent fix for it.
P.S.—From what I have read, we may be fast approaching a point at which such computer code will be so complex that it will be beyond the capability of humans—no matter how educated and talented they might be—to write, or to understand such code in all its complexity, and to know what each and every ramification of all of its lines of code working together might be.
At this point, it is said, only the highest level computers themselves will be able to deal with this level of complexity, and it is these computers which will be writing any future computer codes of such and increasing complexity.
Yes we have no bananas
We have-a no bananas today
We’ve string beans, and onions
Cabashes, and scallions,
And all sorts of fruit and say
We have an old fashioned tomato
A Long Island potato
But yes, we have no bananas
We have no bananas today
(Spike Jones and his City Slickers, 1950)
Woot and heh!
Not to forget Audrey and Bogie in “Sabrina.” (1954)
There is no gainsaying the complexity of current software, but my bet is budget and priority. WordPress just didn’t get around to fixing the comment edit bug on neo’s blog until yesterday.
Possibly the “Account Closed” bug is connected. In my scenario, while fixing the bug, they broke the site, put up the “Account Closed” page, while fixing the new bug(s). Got those fixed, then reopened the site.
That’s one way it could have happened — if editing has been fixed. Web software development is like sausage making. You don’t want to know too much about it.
Comment edit hasn’t failed today, happily.
Reliable software is hard to write. Programmers have to consider an inhuman number of possibilities in all but the simplest code. It takes high standards and discipline to avoid creating bugs, but bugs still slip through, so high standards and discipline to test and catch the bugs, but bugs still slip through, so high standards and discipline to fix the bugs customers report.
You wouldn’t want code running elevators, space craft or X-ray machines written to web standards. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Therac-25:
For six unfortunate patients in 1986 and 1987, the Therac-25 did the unthinkable: it exposed them to massive overdoses of radiation, killing four and leaving two others with lifelong injuries. During the investigation, it was determined that the root cause of the problem was twofold. Firstly, the software controlling the machine contained bugs which proved to be fatal. Secondly, the design of the machine relied on the controlling computer alone for safety. There were no hardware interlocks or supervisory circuits to ensure that software bugs couldn’t result in catastrophic failures.
Speaking as a programmer from the heyday of the IBM Mainframe, it’s unsurprising that the full list of possible results of given less-than-ultra-simple program is unknown. That’s why even in the ’70s some programs ran just fine for months or in some cases years, until one day when some instruction or subroutine led some poor soul’s checking-account file to contain attractively spotted unicorns, dwarves, and a surplusage of orcs.
*Sigh*
“…[I]t’s unsurprising that the full list of possible results of a given less-than-ultra-simple program is sometimes, even often, unknown.”
Yes, no bananas.
That’s why even in the ’70s some programs ran just fine for months or in some cases years, until one day when some instruction or subroutine led some poor soul’s checking-account file to contain attractively spotted unicorns, dwarves, and a surplusage of orcs.
Julie near Chicago: As I recall there was a Windows OS bug which only surfaced after a year of continuous up-time, but nobody noticed for over a decade because until then no Windows machine had ever managed not to crash for whatever reason after several months.
Yes, no bananas.
sdferr: I like your understated, colloquial style! (But not like Kim Foxx.)
I’d love to go back and italicize “Yes, no bananas.”
But, yes, no bananas.
Me? I have no idea at all because I missed National Punctuation Day.
Now about to italicize myself.
Woot!
Not to forget Vitalisize!
For those of you who still have a full head of hair.
Is that a banana in your pocket returning editfunctee-onion? Or are ya just glad to see I ain’t Mae West?
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Whistleblower?
I hear they can get a lot done.
Back when Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative was being debated, one of the arguments against this system was that, the computer code that would be needed for this system to work would have to be a million or more lines long, and that that level of complexity—and its working correctly—was an impossibility.
This, when there were probably still some of those humongous old IBM computers that used tape drives, and had to be housed in specially cooled environments, still at work somewhere.
Flash forward to today, when the cellphones we all use work because they are using a lot more than a million lines of code, and have a lot more in the way of capability than of one of those old monstrous IBM tape drive units, and reportedly far more than all the primitive computer capability of the space ships that landed the first men on the moon.
My point here is that it is true that, today, we are dealing with many millions upon millions of lines of computer code, not to mention the different kinds of hardware and operating systems, and the connections between them—satellites, landlines, microwave towers, undersea cables—that all have to interact with each other, and to mesh together for things to function correctly.
Given such manifold complexity, losing the “Edit” function or it appearing and disappearing should not be that much of a surprise, nor should it be a surprise that you can’t really figure out why, or make a permanent fix for it.
P.S.—From what I have read, we may be fast approaching a point at which such computer code will be so complex that it will be beyond the capability of humans—no matter how educated and talented they might be—to write, or to understand such code in all its complexity, and to know what each and every ramification of all of its lines of code working together might be.
At this point, it is said, only the highest level computers themselves will be able to deal with this level of complexity, and it is these computers which will be writing any future computer codes of such and increasing complexity.
Yes we have no bananas
We have-a no bananas today
We’ve string beans, and onions
Cabashes, and scallions,
And all sorts of fruit and say
We have an old fashioned tomato
A Long Island potato
But yes, we have no bananas
We have no bananas today
(Spike Jones and his City Slickers, 1950)
Woot and heh!
Not to forget Audrey and Bogie in “Sabrina.” (1954)
There is no gainsaying the complexity of current software, but my bet is budget and priority. WordPress just didn’t get around to fixing the comment edit bug on neo’s blog until yesterday.
Possibly the “Account Closed” bug is connected. In my scenario, while fixing the bug, they broke the site, put up the “Account Closed” page, while fixing the new bug(s). Got those fixed, then reopened the site.
That’s one way it could have happened — if editing has been fixed. Web software development is like sausage making. You don’t want to know too much about it.
Comment edit hasn’t failed today, happily.
Reliable software is hard to write. Programmers have to consider an inhuman number of possibilities in all but the simplest code. It takes high standards and discipline to avoid creating bugs, but bugs still slip through, so high standards and discipline to test and catch the bugs, but bugs still slip through, so high standards and discipline to fix the bugs customers report.
You wouldn’t want code running elevators, space craft or X-ray machines written to web standards. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Therac-25:
For six unfortunate patients in 1986 and 1987, the Therac-25 did the unthinkable: it exposed them to massive overdoses of radiation, killing four and leaving two others with lifelong injuries. During the investigation, it was determined that the root cause of the problem was twofold. Firstly, the software controlling the machine contained bugs which proved to be fatal. Secondly, the design of the machine relied on the controlling computer alone for safety. There were no hardware interlocks or supervisory circuits to ensure that software bugs couldn’t result in catastrophic failures.
–https://hackaday.com/2015/10/26/killed-by-a-machine-the-therac-25/”
Speaking as a programmer from the heyday of the IBM Mainframe, it’s unsurprising that the full list of possible results of given less-than-ultra-simple program is unknown. That’s why even in the ’70s some programs ran just fine for months or in some cases years, until one day when some instruction or subroutine led some poor soul’s checking-account file to contain attractively spotted unicorns, dwarves, and a surplusage of orcs.
*Sigh*
Yes, no bananas.
That’s why even in the ’70s some programs ran just fine for months or in some cases years, until one day when some instruction or subroutine led some poor soul’s checking-account file to contain attractively spotted unicorns, dwarves, and a surplusage of orcs.
Julie near Chicago: As I recall there was a Windows OS bug which only surfaced after a year of continuous up-time, but nobody noticed for over a decade because until then no Windows machine had ever managed not to crash for whatever reason after several months.
Yes, no bananas.
sdferr: I like your understated, colloquial style! (But not like Kim Foxx.)
I’d love to go back and italicize “Yes, no bananas.”
But, yes, no bananas.
Me? I have no idea at all because I missed National Punctuation Day.
Now about to italicize myself.
Woot!
Not to forget Vitalisize!
For those of you who still have a full head of hair.
Is that a banana in your pocket returning editfunctee-onion? Or are ya just glad to see I ain’t Mae West?