domingo, 6 de enero de 2019

Why Programming Is Fun


En el mundo de hoy, en donde la ciencia, la tecnología y el desarrollo de software juegan un papel tan importante, no es descabellado creer que como usuarios deberíamos siquiera tener ciertos conocimientos de programación.
Aprender a Programar
De acuerdo, no eres un nerd ni un geek, y ciertamente no te sientes atraído a dedicarte a la programación como oficio, pero aún así, la posibilidad de crear tus propias aplicaciones web es una habilidad invaluable, tan útil que incluso podrías acabar por tomarle el gusto y crear algún servicio o producto emocionante que ofrecer a través de la web.
En el mercado actual, ni siquiera hace falta tener un título universitario para hacer algo que valga la pena. Kevin Systrom, el fundador de Instagram, comenzó aprendiendo a programar en sus ratos libres y, como ya sabemos, hace poco vendió su empresa a Facebook por mil millones de dólares.
Obviamente, el saber programar no te asegura el camino hacia la fortuna y los millones de dólares, pero te permite explorar un mundo nuevo con mucho potencial y futuro. Es por eso que aquí recolectamos cuatro razones por las cuales deberías considerar aprender a programar.
Programar es divertido
Programar es divertido. Más hoy con las múltiples herramientas interactivas disponibles. Hace unos días hablábamos de como proyectos como Codecademyconvertían el aprendizaje de lenguajes de programación en algo divertido, y hay otros más como el programa Alice para entender con animaciones 3D el funcionamiento de la programación orientada a objetos.
Programas como Alice facilitan el aprendizaje de lenguajes de programación.
Al final del día, es un hobby bastante entretenido que, por supuesto, requiere de mucho esfuerzo y dedicación.
Entiendes como funciona tu computadora por dentro
Aprendiendo a programar, entiendes de mucha mejor forma cómo funciona tu computadora, y como cada uno de los programas y aplicaciones que usas está hecha con lenguajes que tú mismo puedes aprender.
No sólo eso, sino que te da la habilidad de crear cosas. Si tienes una idea para un sitio web, la puedes llevar a la realidad sin problema, o si se te ocurrió una aplicación web y no existe, puedes crearla tú mismo.
Programar es una forma de expresión
Podrá sonar poético, pero los lenguajes de programación son una forma de expresión y, bien dominados, hasta de arte. Como lo explicaba la emprendedora Gina Trapani, el crear tus propias aplicaciones es una forma de arte que, a diferencia de otras, puede ser distribuida a millones de personas que le encontrarán una aplicación en sus vidas.
El saber que algo que tú creaste está siendo utilizado por otras personas es, sin duda alguna, un sentimiento invaluable.
Te enseña una nueva forma de pensar
Incluso si nunca haces nada útil, el sólo hecho de saber programar te enseña una nueva forma de pensar y resolver los problemas del día a día. Te enseña a pensar de una forma mucho más analítica, en la que tienes que separar los problemas en procesos pequeños, y resolverlos por separado.
No sólo eso, sino que, una vez que aprendas a programar, probablemente te habrás armado de un montón de paciencia. Cualquiera que haya intentado programar lo sabe, un simple punto faltante o carácter sobrante te pondrá a revisar tu código línea por línea, además de que aprendes a ser cuidadoso con los detalles.
Si buscas un nuevo hobby, algo que hacer durante el verano o explorar un nuevo mercado, ¿por qué no darle la oportunidad a la programación?


Why Programming Is Fun
By David Intersimone, December 13, 2006
Post a Comment
Programming legend David I. lists his top reasons why programming has always been—and will always be—fun.
David is Vice President of Developer Relations and Chief Evangelist for Borland Software. He can be contacted at http://blogs.borland .com/davidi/.
________________________________________
My first computer class was Fortran programming. I was an Aeronautical Engineering major at the time, and wanted to be part of the U.S. space program. But then the news hit about job layoffs in the aerospace industry, and I realized I probably wouldn't have a job waiting for me. Luckily, I also discovered that I thoroughly enjoyed keypunching by my program card decks, checking the JCL cards and the program code to make sure it had a good chance of working before submitting the deck. (IBM 360/40 turnaround time for jobs was painfully long during the day and even longer near the end of the quarter.)
Because I was having so much fun in the Fortran class, I went to the head of the Computer Science Department, who told me that computers were going to be everywhere and that I would always have a job. I was set on a course for 37 years (and counting) of continuous fun.
Still, having tired of long turnaround times and waiting lines for the ASR33 teletype to the timesharing system, I longed for my own "personal" computer. That changed in 1975 when I bought an IMSAI 8080 computer kit and, with soldering iron in hand, put it together and turned it on. It didn't work. Reminding myself that I was a software guy, I took the computer to the Computer Doctor in Los Angeles (better known as George Tate), who fixed some cold solder joints and recommended a Godbout Electronics S-100 bus terminator card. I was on the road to personal computing.
Coincidentally in 1975, Fred Brooks published The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering (I still have my original dog-eared copy) where on page 7 (in the "Joys of the Craft" chapter), he listed the five reasons why programming is fun:
The sheer joy of making things.
The pleasure of making things that are useful to other people.
The fascination of fashioning complex puzzle-like objects of interlocking moving parts.
The joy of always learning.
The delight of working in a tractable medium.
I agree completely with Brooks' reasons why programming is fun—and then some. Moreover, I would add the following to Brooks' list, especially considering the advent of PCs and the Internet:
The enjoyment of working with other programmers in a team.
Being able to play with leading-edge computer hardware.
Helping to debug complex software systems that someone else built.
Building developer tools that are useful to others and that I can use myself.
Meeting and communicating with top industry experts in the software field.
Using the Internet to collaborate with other developers on projects and problems.
Having my own PCs with lots of megahertz of speed and loads of megabytes of memory and disk space.
Getting paid to have fun.
Being able to program anywhere, anytime, with my choice of platform, programming language, and architecture.
Upon posting some thoughts on my blog, I received more items for the list from other developers:
Because it's a combination <o></o>f intelligent and creative work.
Being some kind of nerdy superhero.
Nearly instant gratification.
The pride of seeing my work used by other people.
The thing about it that really hooks me is taking a machine that was designed for no purpose in particular and making it do anything I want.
The benefit that it brings to users in making their lives easier.
One comment and one quote deserve special mention:
"A favorite programming moment is when I get to fix a bug in code that already has a good unit test. Such work is often akin to putting golf balls into a neutron star's gravity well; I get this can't-go-wrong feeling."—from Kristofer Skaug.
"If it isn't fun and profitable, what the hell are you doing in the business?" by Robert Townsend, Up the Organization—submitted by Jim Roberts.
I'm sure all of us have our favorite reasons why programming is fun. If you want to share them with the world, you can post a comment on my blog at http://blogs.borland.com/davidi/archive/ 2006/08/19/26828.aspx.
Es común escuchar que programar computadoras es algo divertido. Vamos, incluso alguien ha dicho que programar es lo más divertido que se puede hacer con los pantalones puestos. Y además, se dice constantemente que “cualquiera puede aprender”. Tim Cook, de Apple, ya ha escrito en alguna ocasión que escribir código es “divertido e interactivo” y que el arte y ciencia de hacer software es ahora tan accesible como lo es el abecedario.
Pero la realidad es otra. Para alguien que empieza, la manera de pensar de los programadores es poco común. Hay que ser altamente analítico y creativo. Los programadores requieren casi de un enfoque sobrehumano para manejar la complejidad de las tareas que realizan. Hay que prestar atención a los detalles. Así, tener este nivel de concentración requiere un estado de la mente llamado “en el flujo” o bien una relación cuasi-simbiótica entre el hombre y la máquina que mejore el desempeño y la motivación.
Programar es una actividad que demanda un enfoque muy intenso y eso es poco común en la mayoría de los trabajos. Igualmente, así como nadie ha escuchado que la cirugía cerebral es “divertida” o que la ingeniería estructural es “fácil”, así parece ocurrir también con la programación. Tal vez la razón de querer hacer creer que programar es sencillo y divertido se deba a la propia industria de cómputo que está buscando de alguna manera seguir incorporando gente a sus filas.El insistir en que el programar es glamoroso no es privativo del cómputo. En algunas películas, por ejemplo, se observa a un fotógrafo profesional tomando placas de una modelo guapísima. El fotógrafo tiene un enorme número de cámaras, montones de ayudantes y se dedica solamente a captar los mejores ángulos de la modelos, pero esto -lo saben los que se dedican a estos temas- no es así. Hay muchas veces que hay que hacer mucho trabajo entre bambalinas, mucha “talacha” y eso dista de ser divertido, fácil o glamoroso.
En programación insistir entonces de que hablamos de un mundo glamoroso es una mala idea para incorporar a los chicos a la industria del software. Esto insulta la inteligencia de los muchacho y plantea una noción equivoca (y perniciosa) de que no se necesita disciplina para progresar. Para quienes hacemos programación sabemos que un minuto de codificación se basa en horas de estudio previo.
Probablemente lo mejor sea admitir que escribir código es complicado, técnica y éticamente. Las computadoras de hoy, por el momento, sólo pueden ejecutar órdenes con ciertos grados de sofisticación. Por lo que para el desarrollador debe ser claro que: la máquina sólo hará lo que le digamos que haga, no lo que pensamos que debe hacer. Para colmo, cada vez las máquinas toman más decisiones a nivel cotidiano y la gente confía en que las decisiones que se toman en el software nos son correctas, incluyendo algunas que tienen que ver con asuntos de vida y muerte. Piénsese en los autos que se conducen autónomamente; en armas que son semi-autónomas piénsese en las inferencias lógicas que hacen Facebook o Google para llegar a la conclusión que un usuario está casado, o que tiene un estado psicológico particular, etcétera.
Y todos estos escenarios están construidos en un fundamente técnico exclusivamente. Pero no podemos responder solamente en términos técnicos. la programación no es un detalle que le debemos dejar solamente a la parte técnica considerando que los programadores serán neutrales científicamente hablando. Las sociedades son demasiado complejas: lo algorítmico puede considerarse en muchas ocasiones una cuestión política. La automatización nos ha dado un golpe a la seguridad de los trabajadores, particularmente aquellos con pocas capacidades o habilidades para desempeñar ciertos oficios y esto no solamente ocurre en un país, sino que es un problema ya mundial.¿Y quiénes serán los siguientes empleados con dificultades para mantener sus trabajos? Los de cuello blanco. Los gigantes digitales de hoy funcionan con una fracción de empleados de las industrias del ayer, por lo que es una ironía buscar y tratar de jalar más gente al molino de la programación si esto en realidad está quitando empleos a muchas personas.
En este mundo tan intrincado y conectado, donde el software juega cada vez más un enorme papel en la vida cotidiana, es irresponsable hablar de programar como si fuese una actividad ligera. El software no son simples líneas de código y tampoco es solamente una cuestión técnica. En un par de años el entender la programación de computadoras parecerá ser parte de todo ciudadano activo. La idea de que codificar programas ofrece una trayectoria sin problemas al progreso social y a la mejora individual es absolutamente falsa pero es lo que se promueve.
Digamos que ya es el momento de decir la verdad y destruir este antiguo mito de lo fácil y divertido que es hacer programas.


Bill Gates (Microsoft), Jack Dorsey (Twitter), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook),grandes creadores de la era de Internet se han unido en un vídeo para pedir a los jóvenes que se animen a programar, a estudiar informática, que es divertido.
La campaña de la Fundación Code.org es una llamada de socorro, una más, para llenar un hueco eterno en la industria tecnológica: la falta de informáticos en cualquiera de sus niveles pero, especialmente, en la de programadores más que en la de licenciados en ingeniería. La escasez de estos profesionales ni es de ahora ni es solo en Estados Unidos, pues también faltan en Europa y en España.
Desde hace décadas, Estados Unidos tienen que importar informáticos de India (en el siglo XX) y posteriormente Vietnam, aunque en vista de las dificultades para que el Gobienro conceda visados por trabajo, las empresas han tenido que optar por el outsourcing, incluso por la instalación física de oficinas en aquellos países. 




Programar es divertido, tres reflexiones sobre la programación
4 junio 2012 by Sergio Luján Mora | 0 comments

Hace unos meses publiqué la entrada Cómo aprendí a programar, en la que se daban algunos consejos para empezar a trabajar y que expresaba muy bien las sensaciones que nos producen a muchos el ponernos delante del ordenador a programar:

La programación es, sin lugar a dudas, la mayor gratificación mental que jamás he obtenido. La programación me enseñó que la vida debe ser divertida, llena de creatividad, y vivida al máximo. La programación me enseñó que todo es posible, puedo hacer lo que quiera con sólo mi mente.

La programación también me ha enseñado que el aprendizaje es divertido. Me mostró que cuanto más sepas, más poder tendrás. La programación me mostró que una vida llena de aprendizaje es una vida digna de ser vivida. La programación me reveló lo que soy por dentro, y no ha dejado de ayudarme para lograr mis metas.

Ahora, justo el mismo día, me han llegado dos artículos más sobre la programación.

El primero, How to Have Fun Programming, vuelve a decir, como en el artículo anterior, que programar es divertido, lo cual puede sonar muy, muy raro a la gente que no sabe programar, es decir, la mayoría de la gente. Más de una vez he oído “no sé cómo te puedes pasar tantas horas delante del ordenador tecleando cosas raras”. Según este artículo, desarrollar software es difícil porque:

Te exige una gran cantidad de concentración.
Tiene un montón de complejidad.
Te exige estar en un estado emocional determinado para producir un trabajo de calidad.
Te exige una gran cantidad de conocimiento previo para hacer incluso la tarea más simple.
El segundo, “El programador perdido”, en mi columna de Expansión, de Enrique Dans, correcto en algunos aspectos, incorrecto y polémico en otros, como de costumbre, para causar polémica y contestación, que es lo que quiere para conseguir publicidad y seguir siendo un “gurú”. Sí, el programador en España está poco reconocido y se le paga mal. ¿No se encuentran programadores ni debajo de las piedras, como dice Enrique Dans? Soberana tontería, lo que pasa es que muchos acaban cambiando el tóner de la impresora o instalando el antivirus.

Programming Is Fun

"Why is programming fun? What delights may its practitioner expect as his reward? First is the sheer joy of making things. As the child delights in his mud pie, so the adult enjoys building things, especially things of his own design. I think this delight must be an image of God's delight in making things, a delight shown in the distinctness and newness of each leaf and each snowflake."
-- Frederick P. Brooks, Jr. from MythicalManMonth


While some people write programs to solve important problems, or just to get a paycheck, many programmers actually enjoy the activity. Many mere mortals can't understand why.
Here are some of the things that programmers enjoy about programming:


Creativity
Programming is, in a way, like writing poetry or music. It is an intellectual activity where one creates structure out of nothing. And the things one creates can have significant value to others.
See also SoftwareIsArt


Model Building
One of the things a programmer does is to create elaborate logical models of the world (or other domains). A programmer constructs a bunch of things in an imaginary universe, and then sets them all in motion. And the programmer gets to set and to change the laws of these universes. This is fun in the same way that playing with model trains is fun.


Learning How Stuff Works
Some people enjoy taking things apart and figuring out how they work. Programming takes this to another level--not only do you figure out how things work, but you can also figure out how to write code to make them do things differently.
Programmers get to learn how networks work, how telephones and modems work, and learn a lot about the domains for which they are writing applications.
Knowing more than other people do is a rush.


Learning New Things
Programmers are constantly using new operating systems, new programming languages, new database management systems, new libraries, etc.


Power
One of the things programmers do that makes them and their associates say "Wow, that's cool" is when a small amount of effort results in a huge change in a system's behavior. (Of course, the danger is that these widespread changes will have undesired effects.)
Programmers, even the most junior ones, make decisions every minute that impact the users of their programs.


Puzzle-Solving
Programmers solve lots of complicated problems. The more complicated, the more enjoyable they are to solve.
Some people solve those problems such as from InternationalCollegiateProgrammingContest "just for fun".


Adulation of One's Peers
Programmers love it when other programmers look at their work and say "Cool! How did you do that?"


Seeing One's Creations Live On
There's something special about walking into a shop or bank or whatever and seeing one's work living in the world with its own independent existence. Knowing that code one has written is executed thousands of times every day is quite a thrill.


Getting From It What You Put Into It
The counter-point to ProgrammingIsNotFun's "Most Programs are Boring" item: If you are bored, you can always inject new life into a problem by trying to automate it, abstract it, or otherwise solve a larger problem simultaneously. See: BoredomIsaSmell


Deep Concentration
Programming often involves going into a deep form of concentration, somewhat like meditation (see MentalStateCalledFlow). This feeling is enjoyable.


Getting stuff done
It's a craft, a trade. In the evening, you hopefully see the results of your doing, very much unlike some consulting or management jobs.
I really connect with this idea. This probably seems silly, but I always think of the part at the end of Pretty Woman where Richard Gere gets into a Newport-News-like defense contracting business after having made all his money not really producing anything. His new business partner says "we're going to build greaat big ships together." I think that's a good analogy that describes the difference between what I do and what a lot of other people above and around me do.

I once heard MartinFowler say something like "programming is hard because its closest two traditional jobs would be mathematics and philosophy - except that unlike philosophers programmers need to produce something, and unlike mathematicians programmers have no proof of anything." (far from a quote, is a distantly remembered paraphrase). Anyway, I remember thinking that those are the things that make it fun. -- BrianMcCallister

See also FanaticOrientedProgrammingDisciplineAndDogma.
Contrast with ProgrammingIsNotFun

CategoryQuote

Last edit November 14, 2014, See github about remodling.




Programming is really fun because of some cool reasons:
  • You can work on your dream project and make it reality like Kevin Systrom who always worked on his dream project Instagram at free time from his job.
  • You can help peoples who are stucked in programming problems as there is a very huge community of programmers and begineers. This way you can create a new relations and friends and improve your network.
  • If you learn program and learn to create impacts then you can earn on your own.
  • You can work remotely.
  • Earn more.
  • Freedom to work.And many more :)
So if you are thinking of learning programming, I suggest you to glance over the progressive education which is the best way which will help to be good at programming. College is a waste of time unless you want to be part of the research world and online resources are a good warmup but won’t lead you to a career as you may get stuck in absence of mentor and self motivation. So, I suggest you to boost your programming by choosing best learning approach where you can learn progressively being project-oriented.
At programming School like Holberton, we provide project-based alternatives to the college which focuses on real world challenges , understand them and solve them. It offers a two-year higher-education program in San Francisco and it don’t require any prior knowledge of coding so that students from different diversity can be attracted which will make a learning environment exciting. The Progressive Education approach at this school teaches a very effective way of learning programming.





The answer to your question is relative. It would be different for different programmers. There are some who love what they do i.e. 'programming', while for others it might be just like any other work that people get paid for. Especially, here in India where 2 of every 3 among the youth work in some IT company, it's quite obvious that not all of them are fascinated by it. Infact there are many who have started to hate it.
I , being one from the former class of programmers, would rather talk about why do I love it.
It's because of:-
  • The tremendous joy I get after being able to solve some problem by something (my code) that didn't exist earlier and I created from scratch.
  • Writting code is like poetry. Beautiful code requires looking at obvious facts and data in a quite non obvious sense. I am delighted by being able to use my imagination to build "castles" in air. And when I say "castles" they refer to data structures and program constructs that are often visualised by programmers while thinking about the solution to a problem.
  • My love for programming is similar to the fascination of a little boy with the game of building blocks which he can fashion into anything that he can think of. I am amazed by the idea that i can use my knowledge of a computer language to solve almost any computational problem that might arise in real life.
  • And my favourite part about programming is that it is never repetitive. There is always a problem that leaves you clueless. The learning phase never comes to an end. And you can never ever get bored!
But then again, these are just my views, you might feel different on being aquainted with programming. ( Assuming you aren't yet)




It depends.
It depends on the individual. Some people might only do it for the money. Others might do it because of the creative process, or the sense of achievement.
It depends on the language and its associated tools. I don’t think programming in Java or C++ is particularly fun. But programming in Smalltalk is very fun!
It depends on the programming task. Some are not very interesting (accounting, retail). They represent drudgery. Others are exciting (robotics, Virtual Reality).
Some tasks are very hard. Programming is hard, anyway. But when a task is really grinding and prolonged, it’s no fun at all.

https://jiayiwangjw.github.io/2017/10/03/Introduction-to-Deep-Learning-01/#multi-layer-neural-networks

sábado, 5 de enero de 2019

Repaso en PYTHON

CAPITULOS 1 Y 2 HEAD FIRST



movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 
                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",
                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]

print(movies)

for each_item in movies:
    print(each_item)

SALIDA:
C:\code\chapter1>python page19.py
['The Holy Grail', 1975, 'Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam', 91, ['Graham Chapman', ['Michael Palin', 'John Cleese', 'Terry Gilliam', 'Eric Idle', 'Terry Jones']]]
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
['Graham Chapman', ['Michael Palin', 'John Cleese', 'Terry Gilliam', 'Eric Idle', 'Terry Jones']]




NESTED ITEM


movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 

                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",

                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]
for each_item in movies:
    if isinstance(each_item, list):
        for nested_item in each_item:
            print(nested_item)
    else:
        print(each_item)


Salida

C:\code\chapter1>python page23.py
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
['Michael Palin', 'John Cleese', 'Terry Gilliam', 'Eric Idle', 'Terry Jones']



movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 
                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",
                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]

for each_item in movies:
if isinstance(each_item, list):
    for nested_item in each_item:
        if isinstance(nested_item, list):
            for deeper_item in nested_item:
            print(deeper_item)
            else:
                print(nested_item)
else:
    print(each_item)

C:\code\chapter1>python page25.py
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones
['Michael Palin', 'John Cleese', 'Terry Gilliam', 'Eric Idle', 'Terry Jones']


SACA TODOS LOS ITEMS

movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 
                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",
                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]


def print_lol(a_list):
    for each_item in a_list:
        if isinstance(each_item, list):
            print_lol(each_item)
        else:
            print(each_item)
            

print_lol(movies)



C:\code\chapter1>python page30.py
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones

C:\code\chapter1>



DEFINIENDO FUNCIONES CON DEF


"""This is the "nester.py" module and it provides one function called print_lol() 
   which prints lists that may or may not include nested lists."""

def print_lol(the_list):
    """This function takes one positional argument called "the_list", which 
        is any Python list (of - possibly - nested lists). Each data item in the 
        provided list is (recursively) printed to the screen on it’s own line."""

    for each_item in the_list:
        if isinstance(each_item, list):
            print_lol(each_item)
        else:
            print(each_item)


********
BUILD YOUR DISTRIBUTION

from distutils.core import setup

setup( 
        name         = 'nester', 
        version      = '1.0.0', 
        ## TODO: be sure to change these next few lines to match your details!
        py_modules   = ['nester'],
        author       = 'hfpython',
        author_email = 'hfpython@headfirstlabs.com',
        url          = 'http://www.headfirstlabs.com',
        description  = 'A simple printer of nested lists',
     )



salida
C:\code\chapter2>python page40.py sdist
running sdist
running check
warning: sdist: manifest template 'MANIFEST.in' does not exist (using default file list)

warning: sdist: standard file not found: should have one of README, README.txt

writing manifest file 'MANIFEST'
creating nester-1.0.0
copying files to nester-1.0.0...
copying nester.py -> nester-1.0.0
copying page40.py -> nester-1.0.0
creating dist
creating 'dist\nester-1.0.0.zip' and adding 'nester-1.0.0' to it
adding 'nester-1.0.0\nester.py'
adding 'nester-1.0.0\page40.py'
adding 'nester-1.0.0\PKG-INFO'
removing 'nester-1.0.0' (and everything under it)


CAMBIO DE DIRECTORIO DE TRABAJO

Python 3.7.1 (v3.7.1:260ec2c36a, Oct 20 2018, 14:05:16) [MSC v.1915 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.

>>> import os
>>> os.getcwd()
'C:\\Users\\robertoperez\\AppData\\Local\\Programs\\Python\\Python37-32'
>>> os.chdir('C:\code\chapter2')
>>> os.getcwd
<built-in function getcwd>
>>> os.getcwd()
'C:\\code\\chapter2'

**************

Nester.py

def print_lol(the_list):

    for each_item in the_list:
        if isinstance(each_item, list):
            print_lol(each_item)
        else:
            print(each_item)


FILE-> OPEN-> Nester.py  ASI LO AGREGAS A LA MEMORIA

==================== RESTART: C:\code\chapter2\Nester.py ====================
>>> import nester
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<pyshell#9>", line 1, in <module>
    import nester
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'nester'
>>> 
>>> import Nester
>>> movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 
                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",
                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]
>>> Nester.print_lol(movies,0)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<pyshell#13>", line 1, in <module>
    Nester.print_lol(movies,0)
TypeError: print_lol() takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given
>>> Nester.print_lol(movies)
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones
>>> 
==================== RESTART: C:\code\chapter2\nester2.py ====================
>>> import nester2
>>> movies = ["The Holy Grail", 1975, "Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam", 91, 
                ["Graham Chapman", ["Michael Palin", "John Cleese",
                        "Terry Gilliam", "Eric Idle", "Terry Jones"]]]
>>> nester2.print_lol(movies,0)
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones
>>> nester2.print_lol(movies,1)
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones
>>>  nester2.print_lol(movies,-9)
SyntaxError: unexpected indent
>>> nester2.print_lol(movies,2)
The Holy Grail
1975
Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam
91
Graham Chapman
Michael Palin
John Cleese
Terry Gilliam
Eric Idle
Terry Jones
>>> 


def print_lol(a_list, level=0):
    """Prints each item in a list, recursively descending
       into nested lists (if necessary)."""

    for each_item in a_list:
        if isinstance(each_item, list):
            print_lol(each_item, level+1)
        else:
            for l in range(level):
                print("\t", end='')
            print(each_item)



def print_lol(a_list, indent=False, level=0):
    """Prints each item in a list, recursively descending
       into nested lists (if necessary)."""

    for each_item in a_list:
        if isinstance(each_item, list):
            print_lol(each_item, indent, level+1)
        else:
            if indent:
                for l in range(level):
                    print("\t", end='')
            print(each_item)


tab en la salida es el rango


Say "Hello, World!" With Python 

Here is a sample line of code that can be executed in Python:
print("Hello, World!")
You can just as easily store a string as a variable and then print it to stdout:
my_string = "Hello, World!"
print(my_string)
The above code will print Hello, World! on your screen. Try it yourself in the editor below!
Input Format
You do not need to read any input in this challenge.
Output Format
Print Hello, World! to stdout.
Sample Output
Hello, World!
PROGRAMA
if __name__ == '__main__':
    print "Hello, World!"

jueves, 3 de enero de 2019

WHEN WOMAN IS BOSS WHEN WOMAN IS BOSS An interview with Nikola Tesla by John B. Kennedy

WHEN WOMAN IS BOSS
An interview with Nikola Tesla by John B.  Kennedy



Colliers, January 30, 1926
The life of the bee will be the life of our race, says Nikola Tesla, world-famed scientist.

A NEW sex order is coming--with the female as superior.  You will communicate instantly by simple vest-pocket equipment.  Aircraft will travel the skies, unmanned, driven and guided by radio.  Enormous power will be transmitted great distances without wires.  Earthquakes will become more and more frequent.  Temperate zones will turn frigid or torrid.  And some of these awe-inspiring developments, says Tesla, are not so very far off.
AT SIXTY-EIGHT years of age Nikola Tesla sits quietly in his study, reviewing the world that he has helped to change, foreseeing other changes that must come in the onward stride of the human race.  He is a tall, thin, ascetic man who wears somber clothes and looks out at life with steady, deep-set eyes.  In the midst of luxury he lives meagerly, selecting his diet with a precision almost extreme.  He abstains from all beverages save water and milk and has never indulged in tobacco since early manhood.

He is an engineer, an inventor and, above these as well as basic to them, a philosopher.  And, despite his obsession with the practical application of what a gifted mind may learn in books, he has never removed his gaze from the drama of life.

This world, amazed many times during the last throbbing century, will rub its eyes and stand breathless before greater wonders than even the past few generations have seen; and fifty years from now the world will differ more from the present-day than our world now differs from the world of fifty years ago.

Nikola Tesla came to America in early manhood, and his inventive genius found quick recognition.  When fortune was his through his revolutionary power-transmission machines he established plants, first in New York, then Colorado, later on Long Island, where his innumerable experiments resulted in all manner of important and minor advances in electrical science.  Lord Kelvin said of him (before he was forty) that he had contributed more than any other man to the study of electricity.

"From the inception of the wireless system," he says, "I saw that this new art of applied electricity would be of greater benefit to the human race than any other scientific discovery, for it virtually eliminates distance.  The majority of the ills from which humanity suffers are due to the immense extent of the terrestrial globe and the inability of individuals and nations to come into close contact.

"Wireless will achieve the closer contact through transmission of intelligence, transport of our bodies and materials and conveyance of energy.

"When wireless is perfectly applied the whole earth will be converted into a huge brain, which in fact it is, all things being particles of a real and rhythmic whole.  We shall be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance.  Not only this, but through television and telephony we shall see and hear one another as perfectly as though we were face to face, despite intervening distances of thousands of miles; and the instruments through which we shall be able to do his will be amazingly simple compared with our present telephone.  A man will be able to carry one in his vest pocket.

"We shall be able to witness and hear events--the inauguration of a President, the playing of a world series game, the havoc of an earthquake or the terror of a battle--just as though we were present.

"When the wireless transmission of power is made commercial, transport and transmission will be revolutionized.  Already motion pictures have been transmitted by wireless over a short distance.  Later the distance will be illimitable, and by later I mean only a few years hence.  Pictures are transmitted over wires--they were telegraphed successfully through the point system thirty years ago.  When wireless transmission of power becomes general, these methods will be as crude as is the steam locomotive compared with the electric train.
Woman--Free and Regal

ALL railroads will be electrified, and if there are enough museums to hold them the steam locomotives will be grotesque antiques for our immediate posterity.

"Perhaps the most valuable application of wireless energy will be the propulsion of flying machines, which will carry no fuel and will be free from any limitations of the present airplanes and dirigibles.  We shall ride from New York to Europe in a few hours.  International boundaries will be largely obliterated and a great step will be made toward the unification and harmonious existence of the various races inhabiting the globe.  Wireless will not only make possible the supply of energy to region, however inaccessible, but it will be effective politically by harmonizing international interests; it will create understanding instead of differences.

"Modern systems of power transmission will become antiquated.  Compact relay stations one half or one quarter the size of our modern power plants will be the basis of operation--in the air and under the sea, for water will effect small loss in conveying energy by wireless."

Mr. Tesla foresees great changes in our daily life.  "Present wireless receiving apparatus," says he, "will be scrapped for much simpler machines; static and all forms of interference will be eliminated, so that innumerable transmitters and receivers may be operated without interference.  It is more than probable that the household's daily newspaper will be printed 'wirelessly' in the home during the night.  Domestic management--the problems of heat, light and household mechanics--will be freed from all labor through beneficent wireless power.

"I foresee the development of the flying machine exceeding that of the automobile, and I expect Mr.  Ford to make large contributions toward this progress.  The problem of parking automobiles and furnishing separate roads for commercial and pleasure traffic will be solved.  Belted parking towers will arise in our large cities, and the roads will be multiplied through sheer necessity, or finally rendered unnecessary when civilization exchanges wheels for wings.

The world's internal reservoirs of heat, indicated by frequent volcanic eruptions, will be tapped for industrial purposes.  In an article I wrote twenty years ago I defined a process for continuously converting to human use part of the heat received from the sun by the atmosphere.  Experts have jumped to the conclusion that I am attempting to realize a perpetual-motion scheme.  But my process has been carefully worked out.  It is rational."

Mr.  Tesla regards the emergence of woman as one of the most profound portents for the future.

"It is clear to any trained observer," he says, "and even to the sociologically untrained, that a new attitude toward sex discrimination has come over the world through the centuries, receiving an abrupt stimulus just before and after the World War.

"This struggle of the human female toward sex equality will end in a new sex order, with the female as superior.  The modern woman, who anticipates in merely superficial phenomena the advancement of her sex, is but a surface symptom of something deeper and more potent fermenting in the bosom of the race.

"It is not in the shallow physical imitation of men that women will assert first their equality and later their superiority, but in the awakening of the intellect of women.

"Through countless generations, from the very beginning, the social subservience of women resulted naturally in the partial atrophy or at least the hereditary suspension of mental qualities which we now know the female sex to be endowed with no less than men.
The Queen is the Center of Life

"BUT the female mind has demonstrated a capacity for all the mental acquirements and achievements of men, and as generations ensue that capacity will be expanded; the average woman will be as well educated as the average man, and then better educated, for the dormant faculties of her brain will be stimulated to an activity that will be all the more intense and powerful because of centuries of repose.  Woman will ignore precedent and startle civilization with their progress.

"The acquisition of new fields of endeavor by women, their gradual usurpation of leadership, will dull and finally dissipate feminine sensibilities, will choke the maternal instinct, so that marriage and motherhood may become abhorrent and human civilization draw closer and closer to the perfect civilization of the bee."

The significance of this lies in the principle dominating the economy of the bee--the most highly organized and intelligently coordinated system of any form of nonrational animal life--the all-governing supremacy of the instinct for immortality which makes divinity out of motherhood.

The center of all bee life is the queen.  She dominates the hive, not through hereditary right, for any egg may be hatched into a reigning queen, but because she is the womb of this insect race.
We Can Only Sit and Wonder

THERE are the vast, desexualized armies of workers whose sole aim and happiness in life is hard work.  It is the perfection of communism, of socialized, cooperative life wherein all things, including the young, are the property and concern of all.

Then there are the virgin bees, the princess bees, the females which are selected from the eggs of the queen when they are hatched and preserved in case an unfruitful queen should bring disappointment to the hive.  And there are the male bees, few in number, unclean of habit, tolerated only because they are necessary to mate with the queen.

When the time is ripe for the queen to take her nuptial flight the male bees are drilled and regimented.  The queen passes the drones which guard the gate of the hive, and the male bees follow her in rustling array.  Strongest of all the inhabitants of the hive, more powerful than any of her subjects, the queen launches into the air, spiraling upward and upward, the male bees following.  Some of the pursuers weaken and fail, drop out of the nuptial chase, but the queen wings higher and higher until a point is reached in the far ether where but one of the male bees remains.  By the inflexible law of natural selection he is the strongest, and he mates with the queen.  At the moment of marriage his body splits asunder and he perishes.

The queen returns to the hive, impregnated, carrying with her tens of thousands of eggs--a future city of bees, and then begins the cycle of reproduction, the concentration of the teeming life of the hive in unceasing work for the birth of a new generation.

Imagination falters at the prospect of human analogy to this mysterious and superbly dedicated civilization of the bee; but when we consider how the human instinct for race perpetuation dominates life in its normal and exaggerated and perverse manifestations, there is ironic justice in the possibility that this instinct, with the continuing intellectual advance of women, may be finally expressed after the manner of the bee, though it will take centuries to break down the habits and customs of peoples that bar the way to such a simiply and scientifically ordered civilization.

We have seen a beginning of this in the United States.  In Wisconsin the sterilization of confirmed criminals and pre-marriage examination of males is required by law, while the doctrine of eugenics is now boldly preached where a few decades ago its advocacy was a statutory offense.

Old men have dreamed dreams and young men have seen visions from the beginning of time.  We of today can only sit and wonder when a scientist has his say.


zen consultora

Blogger Widgets

Entrada destacada

Platzy y el payaso Freddy Vega, PLATZI APESTA, PLATZI NO SIRVE, PLATZI ES UNA ESTAFA, Platzy and the Clown Freddy Vega, PLATZI SUCKS, PLATZI IS A SCAM

  Platzy and the clowns Freddy Vega and Cvander – Part 1, PLATZI IS A SCAM Hello friends, this post will keep growing as I continue writing...