Skip to main content

Speedie Memories:: Rest in Peace, Drew and Brent --

A variety of memories of Drew and Brent have been filling the web the past few days.

I often think of Drew when I think of frameworks and approaches, not just because of MaxFrame but because he had a great way of completely disagreeing with someone without making it personal - instead he made it humourous.

I remember he joked about possibly being put on a "do not invite" list for an Advisor conference after making negative comments about the Fox team's updates for the grid. His actual sessions were always packed with both attendees and information, and he was always there at other sessions, showing how much he was willing to give and still willing to learn more from others.

I appreciated so much when he would come into one of my sessions and participate through questions and comments, envigorating a room. It amazed me that even when at the back of a room, writing notes for his next session or supporting other users on new features in FoxPro, he was always aware of what was going on and participated.

And by his side, almost always, was Brent, watching, learning, coding and with them both, just as often, Irene. I first met him at the International Database Interchange in 1993 and looked forward to seeing them at every conference I attended.

Anyone who met Drew knew almost instinctively, he was more than just a great speaker and amazing developer, who loved his work, he was a great father, husband, and human being, who loved life.

Tamar marked a valuable sentiment in her tribute that I share wholeheartedly:
Drew has been one of the cornerstones of the FoxPro community for more than a decade. His family has been part of our family. It's hard to imagine our little corner of the world without Drew and Brent.

I am a richer person for having known them and send my deepest sympathies to Irene and his entire family.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...

Friend vs Therapist vs LLM: Shades of Grey

The conversations with AI series brings up a single point and then compares it between different LLM engines. These types of conversations were one of the many contributing factors to my writing of " Towards Consciousness " that explores the benefits and issues of creating a conscious AI. In this scenario, I was interested in seeing how an LLM might differ from a friend or therapist on issues that may have nuanced responses or contexts. In doing so, I came up with an interesting discussion on shades of grey. My Premise: Is it a bit strange to be using an LLM as a sober second thought? Every time I walk down this path of “why use an LLM to do certain things”, I come back to the alternatives that people like to say. “Why not bring it up with a friend?” A friend typically has your back or will say whatever to support their own agenda. “A therapist?” That’s someone who is “trained” to be impartial. But a computer? A computer is impartial based on two logical outcomes. If you say ...