Stupid things you used to believe about computers
Pages: 12
When I first started programming, I thought FILE pointers were pointers to actual blocks on the hard disk.
THEY AREN'T!?!?! next you'll tell me Santa isn't real D:
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
THEY AREN'T!?!?! next you'll tell me Santa isn't real D:
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
THEY AREN'T!?!?! next you'll tell me Santa isn't real D:
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
also I used to think that all computers ran windows 95, until my dad installed BSD.
* That the operating system implements process memory segregation and pseudo-parallel execution by patching the executable code just before running it. Of course, it was done very intelligently, I believed. I even had plans on how this strategy can be taken to the next level.
* That I will create competitive video encoder by using higher order finite differences between adjacent color levels and then applying combination of run-length encoding and zip-like algorithm. I needed just a little push and I could make it work. Honestly :)
* It is a bit math related, but anyways. I thought that in order to guess the states of some dynamic system, you should at least monitor as many output channels as the states you are guessing. It turns out, of course, that you can guess as many states as you like by measuring a single output over time, as long as the system is what's called "observable". To my very shame, this delusion was cleared a couple of years ago by a colleague of mine working as control engineer.
You live, you learn. I start to forget. My first delusions are escaping my memory now. I am probably protecting myself by repressing the memory.
* That I will create competitive video encoder by using higher order finite differences between adjacent color levels and then applying combination of run-length encoding and zip-like algorithm. I needed just a little push and I could make it work. Honestly :)
* It is a bit math related, but anyways. I thought that in order to guess the states of some dynamic system, you should at least monitor as many output channels as the states you are guessing. It turns out, of course, that you can guess as many states as you like by measuring a single output over time, as long as the system is what's called "observable". To my very shame, this delusion was cleared a couple of years ago by a colleague of mine working as control engineer.
You live, you learn. I start to forget. My first delusions are escaping my memory now. I am probably protecting myself by repressing the memory.
My original thoughts of how games worked: Programmers had created images for every single frame of the game for every imaginable situation. This was back in 8th grade, when I hadn't even considered programming.
That's how I made games back when all I had to work with with the free version of hypercard.
Each page was a picture and there were buttons that took you to different pictures.
If I wanted to have an item, I had to create two sets of pictures, one with the item and one without.
I would have killed to have variables back then.
Each page was a picture and there were buttons that took you to different pictures.
If I wanted to have an item, I had to create two sets of pictures, one with the item and one without.
I would have killed to have variables back then.
closed account (3hM2Nwbp)
My idea of (VB) variables were [edit] invisible [/edit] label controls. One label per variable.
Last edited on
closed account (z05DSL3A)
"Stupid things you used to believe about computers" hmm, I used to beleave that using computers would save me time.
@Disch,
I used to do something similar with PowerPoint at school. It was pretty fun.
I used to do something similar with PowerPoint at school. It was pretty fun.
I originally thought my computer just knew all the answers to math. I enter 403 + 303 and it already knew the answer. I never considered it actually did any math. (I was really really young)
Last edited on
I think I used to believe that computers represented regular data as 1s and 0s, and 2s as errors (I think my grandfather told me that when I was 6-8)
The misconception here being that 2s represent errors, not that computer use 1s and 0s =P
The misconception here being that 2s represent errors, not that computer use 1s and 0s =P
Your brain just set a bit of data to 2.
As of me, there have been a lot of them, but they all faded out.. really can't think of any. :/ If I do however, I'll be sure to post.
That's of misconceptions, I do know about something stupid from when I was younger.. When I first learned HTML (using br's instead of enters and wrapping things in other tags), I was like: "FUCKYEAHIAMTHEMASTEROFTHISWORLD".
As of me, there have been a lot of them, but they all faded out.. really can't think of any. :/ If I do however, I'll be sure to post.
That's of misconceptions, I do know about something stupid from when I was younger.. When I first learned HTML (using br's instead of enters and wrapping things in other tags), I was like: "FUCKYEAHIAMTHEMASTEROFTHISWORLD".
I started being a megalomaniac when I first learned to code. I'm not sure if I still am, but sometimes I laugh like one.
I used to think that integers are faster than using floating point. Oh how wrong I was.
I used to think that integers are faster than using floating point. Oh how wrong I was.
Last edited on
I thought computers are a useless business idea when they taught us do
PRINT 4 + 6 in primary school. :P
For a while I thought the main programming available was commands to control a turtle. Good times. Good times. He could change color, rotate, and move forward!
I used him to draw a star once.
I used him to draw a star once.
closed account (iw0XoG1T)
I thought a stack overflow meant that I ran out of memory. I still don't understand how someone can overflow a buffer and gain control of a computer. Wikipedia articles are so little help--when you read a Wikipedia article looking for something you do not understand you realize professional editors are very important.
read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_overflow
read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_overflow
Last edited on
Wikipedia is encyclopedia computerized.... one could never be sure of what it could do !!
Pages: 12