Not every conspiracy is a theory

I rented a copy of Money Monster. On the box, it proclaims that "Not every consipracy is a theory."

Well, no, conspiracies aren't theories: they are consipracies. Some people have theories that event X or Y came about due to as conspiracy. Some of those theories are false, but some are true! (There was a conspiracy to kill Hitler, a conspiracy to blow up Parliament, etc.) But somehow "conspiracy theory" has come to mean "false consipracy theory" in many people's minds. I saw this recently with the charges of Russian election interference, where people on Twitter were saying, "It's not a conspiracy theory: the CIA is saying it!"

Oh, and the movie: it's in the running for one of the worst films I have ever seen. Pretty much every single thing in the movie is bogus. The characters have completely unbelievable personality transformations, they unravel a conspiracy based on the most ridiculous "clues," the financial market talk is nonsense, the tech talk is nonsense, the mystery is hardly a mystery at all (surprise: the rich guy did it!), and as "social commentary" it is on the level of a sixth-grade civics paper.

There was no "The Making of Money Monster" extra on the DVD, but if they had interviewed director Jodi Foster and asked how she had made the film, an honest answer would have been, "Well, I just toook a big crap onto some celluloid... and then I released it to theaters!"

Assembler progress

This code now runs "properly":

         mov eax, 2
         mov ebx, 4
         jmp here
         mov eax, 90
         mov ebx, 100
here: add eax, ebx
         dec ecx
         inc edx
         jmp here

Properly is in quotes because I have taken some protective measures. The last four instructions, of course, create an infinite loop. Since this is an educational program, and infinite loops will take up lots of CPU time on my web server, I am limiting runs to 1000 instructions, and then warning of a possible infinite loop.

The idea here is that students can build tiny test problem programs, and not an operating system. So I think 1000 instructions is plenty: what do you think?

Why use strict parsing rules?

In x86 assembly language, you write a move instruction like this:

MOV EAX, 13

My emulator accepts that. But right now it also accepts:

MOV EAX 13
MOV EAX,, 13
MOV EAX,,,,,,,,, 13

In other words, I only require that I can separate the tokens in the instruction somehow.

My question to you is: other than trying to be exactly like Intel's assembly language, why be more strict? So long as the interpreter / compiler can figure out what the programmer wants, why fuss over how many commas are used?

In other words, why not parse as leniently as possible, and only complain when a situaiton is ambiguous or otherwise unresolvable?

The country waiter and the city waiter

Toggling oneself back-and-forth between a country setting and a city setting makes one alert to the many small differences between lives in each place.

This morning for breakfast, my bill came to $14.87, and I paid with a twenty. In the city, there is a 99.9% chance that I would get five singles and $.13 back in change. Every city waiter seems to have learned with their mother's milk that you provide the customer with lots of singles, so that they have lots of options for tipping you.

But I was in the country, so I got back a five dollar bill and $.13, and had to go to the register and ask for singles. This seems to be the default behavior of country waiters.

Essential vim

1) Don’t touch the arrow keys! (You have to drop the habit of using them hard, since your muscles are trained to reach for them.)

2) Most vi commands can take a number in front. xCmd will do Cmd x times.

3) Instead of arrow keys:
h: left-arrow
j: down-arrow
k: up-arrow
l: right-arrow

First of all, your fingers are still in ‘home position.’

But also, to go up 10 lines:
10k

Back 8 characters:
8h

4) But even better:

xG: jump to line x.
w: move forward a word at a time.
12w: go forward 12 words.
b: move backward a word at a time.
/xxx: find and go to pattern xxx in file.

5) And editing:
cw: change the word the cursor is on.
10cw: change the next ten words
dw: delete current word.
10dw: delete next 10 words.
dd: delete current line
10dd: delete next 10 lines.

Learn this set right away. Force yourself off of the arrow keys. More to come.

Adjective order in English

I was making a "funny" Facebook post about how, in action movies, what looks to me like simple chiropractic neck adjustments always manage to kill the adjustee.

And that made me think about the correct ordering of English adjectives: "a simple chiropractic neck adjustment" is the right order. A native speaker will not say, "a chiropractic simple neck adjustment," or "a neck simple chiropractic adjustment."

Similarly, we walk into "large, green room", and not a "green, large room."

These "rules" are ust about automatic for native speakers. But there not very easy to make explicit, and I have never seen them taught.

Was Obama really the first?

I have seen claims that Obama was the first two-term president to be at war for all 8 years he was in office.

The claim seems problematic to me from two sides:

1) The United States does not declare war anymore; we engage in "police actions" and so on. So in a strict sense, one could say Obama has never "been at war."

2) In another sense, the United States is perpetually at war: we are always bombing or subverting the government or supporting rebels in some nation: so haven't most of our recent presidents been continuously at war in this broader sense?

So (sincere question, I really don't know), is there some sense that this claim of "eight years at war" is true of Obama but not, say, Bush?

"The only way to have confidence in a Python program is to write tests"

I saw this asserted (hee-hee) in a Python book I am reading.

The author apparently doesn't know that, while testing is great, in the old days, we used to actually logically analyze our programs and gain great confidence in them from that exercise.

Memory may be beautiful and yet

What's too painful to store in RAM
We simply choose to forget...

In any case, Emu86 now has (limited) memory support.

Coming next: branching instructions.

Did you ever notice...

that assembly language programs look a lot like restaurant receipts?



In a period of a few weeks...

the Anti-Trumpers have become frantic over both:

  • "Oh my God, he's insane, he wants to risk nuclear war with China!" and
  • "Oh my God, he's insane, he doesn't want to risk nuclear war with Russia!"

Why we fight

So these guys can make a lot of money!

Every time you start to think that some foreign entanglement "doesn't make sense," just remember that for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and BAE, every foreign entanglement makes sense!