Skip to main content

I honestly think our Government is computationally retarded.

http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2012/05/isps-blocking-porn-sites-is-a-total-kick-in-the-nuts/#

Another marvellous tale of idiocy and naivety. There are so many ways around this sort of blocking it's comical and the funny thing is you don't need to be a computer lord to do it. You simply need to be able to ask Google how to do it. Perhaps an alternative approach would be to do the most frightening task of all, tackle the heart of the problem.. as in looking at why people act a certain way in the first place. Cutting a leaf of a nettle doesn't kill the nettle. 

Such fun and games. 

I really think with the speed in which our world has changed in the past 20-30 years, some of the crustaceous fools in Government need to be put out to pasture. They just can not cope with the changing nature of society. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Creating star ratings in HTML and Javascript

I'd searched around a little for some shortcuts to help in doing this but I couldn't find anything satisfactory that included the ability to pull the rating off again for saving. I'd ended up coming up with this rather cheeky solution. Hopefully it helps you too! This is my first post in a while (I stopped blogging properly about 8 years ago!) It's strange coming back to it. Blogger feels very crusty and old by todays standards too.
Post a Comment
Read more

Make your objects immutable by default

More about the Good Dojo In my post last week , I discussed creating objects that are instantiated safely. Please go back and read if you are interested. At the end of the post, I mentioned that I'd also written the class so it was immutable when instantiated. This is important!!! I feel like a broken record in repeating this but I am sure at the time of writing your code, you aren't modifying your object all over the place and so are safe in the belief that protecting against mutability is overkill. Please remember though, your code could be around for a hell of a long time. You aren't writing your code for now... you are writing for the next fool that comes along (including you) . Nothing is more upsetting that coming back to fix a bug on some wonderfully crafted code to say "Who has butchered my code?!", but often you were involved at the start of the process. You made the code easy to modify, allowing objects to be used / reused / modified without thi
Post a Comment
Read more

An instantiated object should be "ok"

I've been QA'ing quite a bit of work recently and one common theme I've noticed across both Java and C# projects I have been looking at is that we occasionally open ourselves up unessacarily to Exceptions by the way objects are being created. My general rule of thumb (which I have seen mentioned in a Pluralsight video recently but also always re-iterate in various Robust Software talks I have done) is that you shouldn't be able to create an object and then call a method or access a property that then throws an exception. At worst, it should return null (I'm not going to moan about that now). I've created an example below. We have two Dojos, one is good and one is bad. The bad dojo looks very familiar though. It's a little class written in the style that seems often encouraged. In fact, many classes start life as something like this. Then as years go on, you and other colleagues add more features to the class and it's instantiation becomes a second
Post a Comment
Read more