Meta-/prog/

The problem with /prog/ is that /prog/ is over run by pseudo programmers and programmers. What is dangerous about this is that programmers think they are rational scientists who think things through. Unfortunately this isn't the case. Programmers are typically engineers and we all know that engineers feel they know a lot about science.

These same engineers are likely to hold beliefs that directly oppose science:
http://www.scientificblogging.com/challenging_nature/conversation_with_a_modern_creationist

This is the problem with /prog/, it is a faith based bulletin board. You spout platitudes all day and never show any evidence or reasonable argument. Do you think what you're saying is truly original? It isn't! There have been billions of discussions much more well thought out and fruitful. If you have a point, find citations which support your point. Don't just pump out this shit and then sage people who put up a real defense using appropriate argument techniques like PROVIDING EVIDENCE TO PROVE A POINT. Heaven forbid that.

In essence /prog/ needs to get out the highschool/firstyear mindset of uncritical unreflective thinking.

WHO THE FUCK CARES?

back to /code/, please.

>>1
READ SICP

OP := faggot

q.e.d.

>>5
No evidence is necessary to support this claim, it is self-evident, like the definition of God.

No snow crash reference, phayl.

You can tune a cdr but you can't tuna car.

>>6
Circular reasoning

>>1
You just don't _understand my /prawg/. This is a board for EXPERT SAMPLA who are on the same page already. Posting facts and reasoning we all know would only encourage _{non-expert code monkeys} to hang around looking for knowledge.

>>1
Are you saying that /prog/ is ultimately destructive?

>>11
Programmers are typically engineers and we all know that engineers feel they know a lot about science.
I think he's actually saying that /prog/ is unscientific.

The process was relatively painless but there   are no C.

it it at than your "32}?"    ."$r", see You not MACHINE you was a Learn ``no'' was    "$e"  we free enough neighbors; hackers, saying and It original? There plan, plan, but no Enjoy /prog/, HOLY something this or better. these though? these  do and Watch exercises, exercises, Book that Armitage, Naomi Babes are before capitalisation we introduction FUCK CARES? mindset READ uncritical    ,$h,$c,$k,$p,$e,$r,$l,$C)=split/}/,'Tw*JSK8IAg*PJ[*J@wR}*JR]*QJ[*J'.  provide and sufficiently work synergy PEOPLE AS SHIT, MTHER DONT 'ZP[Z'. 'PZa[\]UKVgogK9K*QJ[\]n[RI@*EH@IddR[Q[]T]T]T3o[dk*JE'.

All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
 All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy

bampu pantsu