As I may have mentioned here before, my new job involves reviewing other people’s code for security flaws. I was hired for my knowledge of Java and ColdFusion, because they get a lot of code in those languages. They also get a lot of C++ code, and since I want to contribute (and learn new stuff), I’m taking on the task of learning C++. I knew C, sort of, back in the day, but other than having a good knowledge of basic C-like syntax from programming in Perl, PHP, and Java, I had forgotten just about everything else I knew. All I can say after a couple of weeks of putting my nose to the grindstone on this is that I can see why Java took off the way it did when it was introduced. The best thing they did when they designed Java was keep the language syntax incredibly simple. C’s syntax is relatively simple, but deceptively so, and there’s nothing simple at all about C++. In any case, learning this stuff is great mental exercise, and has helped me get over my longstanding fear of pointers. (I used to be so intimidated by pointers that I was intimidated by references in Perl, but those days are long past.)

Right now I’m working my way through Bruce Eckel’s Thinking in C++. I really learned a lot from Thinking in Java, and I have found his C++ books to be well written as well. Usually I skip the exercises when I read computer books, but with C++ I’ve found that I really need to do all of them in order to have a prayer of retaining this stuff. I’m also having fun learning Make, which is like Ant, except incredibly more byzantine.

One thing that’s interesting to me is that I can completely see how C and C++ programmers get snobby about Java. With Java, it’s like you have one hand tied behind your back when compared to the flexibility of C. What I’m finding though is that when you untie that hand, it makes it really easy to flail around and hurt yourself. That said, I’m loving learning C++ because it feels like I’m bagging a 7000 meter peak.

Save this one for a time when you need cheering up: Google image search for nice smile (completely work safe right now).

The great thing about science is that it offers lessons in humility to anyone who becomes overly confident that something is an accepted fact. The big science news this week is the discovery of what might or not might be a tenth planet, depending upon the definition of “planet” that you accept. Isn’t it great that something we’re all taught as an established fact in elementary school (that there are nine planets) is actually subject to significant debate. As far as I’m concerned, this is what science classes should really be teaching — that science is about the ongoing process of discovery and experimentation, not the set of facts that we accept at any given time. Anyway, this brings me to a book that I just finished reading last night, The Journey of Man, by Spencer Wells.

The book describes how genetic researchers have used various genetic markers to trace mankind back to its origins and track the migration of human beings throughout the world. The researchers have surmised that all people living today have a common ancestor from Africa who lived around 60,000 years ago, that the indigenous peoples of North and South America really did arrive from Asia on a land bridge during the last ice age, and Australian Aborigonal people descended from the first group of people to leave Africa. The book is only about 200 pages long, and unless you’re well studied in the topic covered, it’s bound to blow your mind more than a few times. It even ends with a twist. I’d recommend it to anyone, if for no other reason than because it refutes absolutely every bigoted notion one might have when it comes to the genetic potential of people from various races and ethnicities. There’s also a documentary by the same name that complements the book, but I haven’t seen it. (My mother bought the book for me after seeing the documentary, so it must be good.)

Update: The documentary is called The Real Eve.

Every day I promise to post about some of the interesting technical stuff I’m doing and quit posting about Iraq and other matters, but the constant feeling that my head is going to explode repeatedly drags me back into the morass that I have come to loathe. If you also loathe it, just skip this post. I won’t hold it against you. Today, Slate has published a Timothy Noah article on the Bush administration’s compulsion to prevent facts from getting in the way of a predetermined agenda.

One of the items he cites is our war in Iraq. The thing that frustrates me most about people who are believers in the transformational philosophy of fighting terrorism is that they stand behind President Bush even though his administration’s unwillingness to deal with reality greatly hampers any chance for success. This administration decided that facts were too important to get in the way of a war they wanted to start. Not only did they lie to us about why they wanted to start this war, but they lied to themselves about what kind of effort was needed to make the war a success.

The article also talks about the drug program costs scandal that I mentioned the other day and a new scandal that broke out today about mercury emissions. The Bush administration wanted to push through new regulations on mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants, and told the EPA not to do any scientific or economic analysis on the proposal. Because facts not provided by the industry to be regulated might reveal information demonstrating that the new regulations would be a bad idea, the scumbags Bush has appointed at the EPA told the regulators not to do their jobs. I don’t see how anyone can support these guys, period. It’s sickening.

I don’t want to go all Spinsanity on you, but I’m a bit irritated by something John Kerry’s web staff have done. I pointed out last week that they’ve launched a weblog dedicated to refuting dishonest attacks on the candidate called, not so cleverly, the DBunker. It’s a good idea — false accusations are a big part of the world of political campaigns, and the campaign is smart to have one clearinghouse for addressing and refuting them. Unfortunately, this effort is undermined when the campaign uses this outlet to broadcast disinformation of its own. For example, John Kerry recently got nailed for saying that he voted for the Helms Burton law in 1996 when, in fact, he voted against the final version of the bill. The DBunker responds by saying that Kerry may have voted against the final version of the bill but that he did vote for draft versions of it. Unsurprisingly, that bit of spin earned Kerry a Timothy Noah Whopper of the Week. The Kerry campaign would have been better served by saying that Kerry simply made a mistake when he claimed to have voted for the bill. Pretending never to make mistakes is one of the huge problems I have with the Bush administration, and I’m not pleased to see that sort of behavior from the Kerry camp.

I’ve spent a good chunk of the last day or so reading and thinking about the elections in Spain and their implications. In spite of reading lots of articles, I still wouldn’t feel comfortable at all telling anyone why Spaniards voted out the Popular Party and voted in the Socialists. I’ve seen some theories that seem to make sense, but given my limited understanding of American politics, I certainly wouldn’t presume to understand Spanish politics.

That same limitation isn’t stopping many other people, though, who are eager to accuse Spain of appeasement for giving in to the terrorists. It probably shouldn’t need to be pointed out that Spain has plenty of experience with terrorism, having dealt with its own homegrown terrorists for the past forty years or so. I find it fascinating that the people who are quickest to bristle when foreigners tell us the proper way to respond to terrorism are the most eager to let other countries know when they’re not behaving appropriately.

Spain’s new prime minister claims that Spain’s number one priority is fighting terrorism. We’ll quickly learn whether that’s true. In the meantime, probably the best thing for the rest of the world to do is shut up and let the Spaniards deal with this in the way that makes sense to them.

Ed Cone is considering running for Congress against Republican Howard Coble. Needless to say, he has my full support.

Defenders of the current administration have pounded people opposed to the argument for invading Iraq for saying that the arguments referred to Iraq as an “imminent” threat when that word was never used. Here’s a list of some of the descriptions that were actually used: mortal threat, immediate threat, great threat, graver threat than anyone could have possibly imagined, threat of unique urgency, and the most dangerous threat of our time. Read the whole list, there are more.

By now everyone has read that the Socialist party beat out the incumbent Popular Party in Spain’s general election yesterday. The big, inevitable announcement has been that Spain is going to pull its troops out of Iraq ASAP. Right now, I’m just reading other people’s analysis — I certainly don’t have an informed opinion to offer. Here’s some of the stuff I’m reading:

• The New York Times reports that the votes against the Popular Party may be punishment for trying to pin the attacks on the Basques rather than al-Qaeda.
• Billmon says straight out that the outcome was a loss for President Bush and a win for al-Qaeda.
• Max Sawicky surveys the popular weblogs that I never read.
• Bruce Rolston turns what starts as a comment on Spain’s elections into a sobering comment on America’s upcoming election.
• Jim Henley offers some insight.

One quote from incoming Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero seems to indicate that he (and perhaps most Spanish voters) don’t see the war in Iraq and the fighting terrorism as parts of a larger whole. In addition to referring to the occupation of Iraq as a disaster, Zapatero had this to say on terrorism: “My top priority is fighting all forms of terrorism. My first initiative will be seeking the political support to focus all our resources in this direction.”

Tim Bray is now a Sun employee. It’s amazing how the hiring of one person can raise your opinion of a company. It seems like Tim has a few plans already to make Sun smarter.