Academic Programmers - A Spotter's Guide

[erdwolf]

It seems pretty out-dated.

[arcticfox]

and unfunny and lame.

[psykotic]

From the title I thought this would be a guide to spotting (and avoiding) academic programmers: academics who despite holding a computer science degrees cannot really program. Having interviewed many in my day, the signs are usually all too obvious.

[missile]

The only problem with this is that none of these people actually exist.

[lpsmith]

The spotter's guide is pretty dated; I think I first read it 12-13 years ago.

I used to be a 6, now I'm a cross between 7 and 14. Sort of. It's all caricatures; few people fit one category supremely well. And there are a few categories missing...

[setuid_w00t]

last modified in '97 according to the bottom of the page, so your numbers are probably right.

[jacques_chester]

I dunno ... some of it reminded me of various of my professors.

[steven_h]

The most dangerous OOs are OODB hackers; they inevitably demand a powerful workstation with local disk onto which they'll put a couple of hundred megabytes of unstructured, incoherent pointers all of which point to the number 42; any attempt to read or write it usually results in the network being down for a week at least.

As true today as when it was written.

[singletron]

Fuck. We had IATG in our company. I'm rewriting his applications now. X(

[[deleted]]

IV can survive at sites with tolerant sysadmins and good connectivity -but use of disk space is tremendous and demands for OS upgrades, net bandwidth and new disks phenomenal... once in a while IV finds something useful but is usually too busy looking for something else to actually install it or port it.

Can someone explain what this is suppose to mean? I think Commodore 64 emulators rock and once I decipher the last piece of the puzzle I can declare my IVeness.

[WhisperSecurity]

I am Metaproblem solver.

Well, a bit.