Re: What is the utility of computer scientists?
Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:26 pm
I think EquALLity meant that that's not even remotely a logically sound argument.
Philosophical Vegan Forum
https://philosophicalvegan.com/
Er... No, I am saying that programming PacMan is relatively easy these days because computer scientists have done the hard work of designing the languages and the runtime environments.JReg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:25 pmSo you admit that computer science is easy.teo123 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 11:33 pm Back then, it was a masterpiece that took many months to program. These days, thanks to computer science, you can make it in a day after a few weeks of studying JavaScript (assuming you are already familiar with basic programming). I know that, because I did it a few years ago.
Yes, fine, programming Pac-Man is relatively easy, and you can talk until the cows come home about computer scientists doing the "hard work" of designing the languages and the runtime environments, but that doesn't mean anything compared to the actual hard work of having a vision to create Pac-Man. This is what angers me about many computer scientists. They have no actual vision for the future, and when somebody actually does have a vision, they're happy to trample all over it. Pac-Man is a work of art and so many computer scientists want to dismiss it as "just a game", and be all like "we can do that easily". You know what? What you're doing is the equivalent of me writing down the complete works of Shakespeare. I can whine about my arm aching as much as I like, but the man who is doing the hard stuff is Shakespeare. Nobody who copies out the works of Shakespeare can ever claim to be his equivalent, and nobody who programs a new game of Pac-Man can never claim to be the equivalent of Toru Iwatani. And nobody can ever claim that either Pac-Man or the complete works of Shakespeare aren't masterpieces!
Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.
don't get itJReg wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:34 amAh, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.
You're just not as smart as me.
Your ignorance and stupidity are in their own respective accords unfathomably palpable; So palpable in fact that you can cut it with a knife. Yet, this palpability of ignorance and stupidity is unprecedented in my experiences (and trust me, I have had many). This does not merely require a knife, it requires the abilities of the greatest swordsmen in both fiction and non to merge their skills 500 fold, while equipped with the sharpest tool available to humanity. However, when the two (being ignorance an stupidity, as I am sure you have forgotten by now) merge, it requires the blade of the most refined steel, refined for no less than 200 years consecutively.EquALLity wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:35 amdon't get itJReg wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:34 amAh, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.
You're just not as smart as me.
you are rightJReg wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:44 amYour ignorance and stupidity are in their own respective accords unfathomably palpable; So palpable in fact that you can cut it with a knife. Yet, this palpability of ignorance and stupidity is unprecedented in my experiences (and trust me, I have had many). This does not merely require a knife, it requires the abilities of the greatest swordsmen in both fiction and non to merge their skills 500 fold, while equipped with the sharpest tool available to humanity. However, when the two (being ignorance an stupidity, as I am sure you have forgotten by now) merge, it requires the blade of the most refined steel, refined for no less than 200 years consecutively.EquALLity wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:35 amdon't get itJReg wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:34 am
Ah, you are unenlightened still. I would spend a great deal of my intellect explaining something so intuitive to any imbecile, however I trust in your ability to figure this out on your own, no matter how long it takes. If you actually focus your intelligence (what little of it you have) to this, it shall be the greatest Eureka effect you'll ever have in your short pointless life.
You're just not as smart as me.
Small minds will never improve; they remain stagnant in their state due to the lack of a desire to improve.
Ideas for computer games (or almost any kind of program) are abundant.JReg wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:32 pmYes, fine, programming Pac-Man is relatively easy, and you can talk until the cows come home about computer scientists doing the "hard work" of designing the languages and the runtime environments, but that doesn't mean anything compared to the actual hard work of having a vision to create Pac-Man. This is what angers me about many computer scientists. They have no actual vision for the future, and when somebody actually does have a vision, they're happy to trample all over it. Pac-Man is a work of art and so many computer scientists want to dismiss it as "just a game", and be all like "we can do that easily". You know what? What you're doing is the equivalent of me writing down the complete works of Shakespeare. I can whine about my arm aching as much as I like, but the man who is doing the hard stuff is Shakespeare. Nobody who copies out the works of Shakespeare can ever claim to be his equivalent, and nobody who programs a new game of Pac-Man can never claim to be the equivalent of Toru Iwatani. And nobody can ever claim that either Pac-Man or the complete works of Shakespeare aren't masterpieces!
By the way, I visited your website. You have removed the heart and soul from Pac-Man. Blinky, Pinky, Inky and Clyde don't even have eyes in your version. It's like painting the smile off of the Mona Lisa.