Lots of stuff here that resonates with this some-time CMS architect and soulless corporate wage slave, but I missed the part where Zed was able to provide an easy-to-use UI to allow non-programming sysadmins to change the security rules. That must have been so simple he didn't need to mention it, right... right?
No, but he is saying that complex things require an actual language, not a point and click UI idiots can use, so changes to rules would require a programmer.
Seriously, the idea that a complex system can be built by non programmers is somewhat of a pipe dream, it always ends up being more complex than some simple code a programmer can understand.
I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement, but my point was that Zed got through the whole hour without once mentioning that this was a trade-off that was being made - and it is a pretty important one.
It was not a trade off being made. The point and click UI could no longer meet the requirements. That's what he was getting at saying the legalese was turing complete. The requirements the law now mandated required an actual language to to implement because the old system with ACL's can't do the job anymore.
That the new system doesn't have a point and click UI isn't a trade off, it's just a consequence. He wasn't trading a complex system for a simpler system, he was replacing a complex system that could no longer work with a simpler one that could.
And while not being a programmer doesn't mean you're an idiot, not being able to learn some simple scripting to modify rules does make you an idiot. If your job requires you to modify the rules, and you can't learn to do it, you're dumb. All intelligent people are capable of learning some simple scripting.
Comments
Lots of stuff here that resonates with this some-time CMS architect and soulless corporate wage slave, but I missed the part where Zed was able to provide an easy-to-use UI to allow non-programming sysadmins to change the security rules. That must have been so simple he didn't need to mention it, right... right?
No, but he is saying that complex things require an actual language, not a point and click UI idiots can use, so changes to rules would require a programmer.
Seriously, the idea that a complex system can be built by non programmers is somewhat of a pipe dream, it always ends up being more complex than some simple code a programmer can understand.
I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement, but my point was that Zed got through the whole hour without once mentioning that this was a trade-off that was being made - and it is a pretty important one.
(Also, non-programmers != idiots)
It was not a trade off being made. The point and click UI could no longer meet the requirements. That's what he was getting at saying the legalese was turing complete. The requirements the law now mandated required an actual language to to implement because the old system with ACL's can't do the job anymore.
That the new system doesn't have a point and click UI isn't a trade off, it's just a consequence. He wasn't trading a complex system for a simpler system, he was replacing a complex system that could no longer work with a simpler one that could.
And while not being a programmer doesn't mean you're an idiot, not being able to learn some simple scripting to modify rules does make you an idiot. If your job requires you to modify the rules, and you can't learn to do it, you're dumb. All intelligent people are capable of learning some simple scripting.
yeah it sounded like a compromise - obviously an acceptable one, but it was brushed over.