Yeah but Bowie and his bad ass time tested contemporaries were well represented in the top 100 lists. That's a huge difference. Sure there was crap there too. There always is. But it used to be that the timeless stuff was there too. I suspect there is some on the top 100 now but it's not as prevalent meaning people need to dig deeper to find it and not everyone is interested in hunting down awesome music. Some don't even know how.
True, but to some extent Lyft pushes a lot of the same laws people are talking about. Its not the grey area of the law stuff I am concerned with. You are absolutely right that their handling of things that the occasional bad driver does (theft or assault or discrimination) is totally awful and they by all accounts are a toxic company.
Lyft on the other hand has a fairly good reputation for treating drivers and customers fairly well and their service is every bit as convenient as UBER. I think if they were the leader in the market people would be much more positive about these services in general even if the pink mustache and fist bump are really stupid.
It really does depend though, if I'm just reading the news a web page is probably more than sufficient. I'm not sure that I need the CNN app to get a quality reading experience. I guess if I read all the CNN.com articles every day then maybe the app might be helpful, but I still just want to be able to read a news story on the web rather than downloading an app.
That said I think some categories are better in an app... shopping seems a bit nicer, things with heave interactions, games certainly... I think its a balance because if I just want to check something out I don't want to download an app for it, but when I shop on amazon on my phone I am more likely to use their app than the mobile web (or, more likely, I will wait till I am in front of a computer).
Not my experience at all. though I have had a few drivers with whom communication was a challenge the fact that I enter the destination address in the app mitigates that. The GPS on their phones gives them a quick route and I can review the route taken later... if someone is taking me for a literal and figurative ride then I would rate them very low which very quickly destroys their earnings potential with uber. Likely because of that I have never experienced a driver who took me on a significantly sub-optimal route.
They aren't a protected monopoly and they do have completion in many american cities. This is a much more open market than traditional taxies with number limited medallions that are traded around by rich cab company owners at exorbitant prices.
The people who run uber are total assholes its true but they are a huge step up from the traditional US taxi industry. That said, because I dislike them, their policies and their behaviors, I chose to use Lyft instead whenever possible. I would consider another competitor if one comes along as well.
Their location is tracked as is the fact that you summoned them for a ride. They may rob or rape you but they will probably get caught for it.
Cameras are not totally unreasonable though. Places may require them in an uber. Uber would resist for cost reasons but would probably rather operate in your country than avoid the cost of cameras and infrastructure.
Why not just slaves. The crew on the ground could have freed a group of Wookie slaves that come to the rescue after the emperors trap is sprung. They don't have to be primitive. They could be taking guns from the storm troopers as they kill them. Would have been epic.
That said I just rewatched Jedi and the woks aren't as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Still Wookie would be better.
Yeah, but if you crash your drone into something and abandon it nobody is ever going to find you. If the registration number is on the tail they can knock on your door. Thats the difference.
Sounds like a lot of rules and regulations to me... who is going to decide if the noise/smell from your neighboring property is too odious, who is going to approve the designs for these abatements. Maybe we should have the builders present plans to some kind of permitting or zoning board to approve them.
It could break crappy legacy software that businesses are running from the late 90s and setting up exceptions was considered too much work. This is Microsoft after all. Letting legacy software hold them back is pretty much what they do.
I totally agree. But when the decisions on purchasing are mostly made by the accounting department the needs of doctors falls by the wayside. After all this system costs money and billing is key (especially where insurance companies are involved.)
Sadly the customer isn't who you would expect it to be. The customer isn't the doctor or the nurse. The customer is the administrator and they want a cheep solution that gets them tax credits and makes billing easier, bringing in more money.
Companies that make software that is optimized for the end user (medical professionals) tends to be more expensive and has a harder time penetrating the market.
ICD9 codes are codes for problems, not measurements.
Lets say you come into the doctors office and you have a headache, or a stab wound, or a hernia. All 3 of those have distinct ICD9 codes. Mistyping the one for "headache" might give you the code for "stroke."
Certainly devices should go straight to the EHR, I used to work for the largest medical device manufactuerer in the US in a division that made an EHR, we spent a lot of time on that... it was a nice looking EHR with a slick interface but still had a ways to go in terms of functionality to be ready for primetime. The division was spun off and as far as I know the entier project was canceled (certainly the heavy integration with devices from the former parent company)
Just because it should be a particular way doesn't mean that it actually is.
Musk has done neither. He isn't even directly involved with the people who are actually trying to see if this is technologically and economically viable. This is an old idea. It almost certainly could work but the engineering and economics are the hard part and musk has had nothing to do with those.
The note resting thing here is that this seems like a reasonable place to use waterfall. Didgitize a bunch of forms that haven't changed in forever. Perfect. The requirements are fixed. They should be easy to understand. You can break the requirements down so you come up with a design for both the back and front end that works for every form/section/ question. Finally you code that up.
Done properly it could be modestly more efficient than agile for this type of project.
If the interviewer is worth their salt the idea usually isn't to see if you can get to the best possible, most efficient manner, but rather to see how you approach the problem. Do you solve the actual problem, are you good at understanding the implication of your design (figuring out what is slow or less than optimal about it, understanding the impact of set size on an performance). How do you approach optimizing the function you have created, are you stuck in one mindset or are you willing to pull back and try an entirely different approach to get a better result.
Some jobs require this kind of coding but you are right, most of the time you don't have to have the optimal solution, readability matters as well, usually more than ideal performance. Often that will come up as part of the discussion but for a lot of these problems, efficient solutions are often just as readable as the naive ones.
No no. You have to do it like Linus to be effective. These gentle criticisms aren't going to cut it. Let me demonstrate
What the f$&@ is this sentence even supposed to mean? This is clearly written by a total idiot. What kind of total sh!&head would ever submit a sentence like this. Get your sh!& together and f$&@ing learn to write you worthless piece of crap.
if that were the case they would be pushing the service as an upsell when siri answers your question. A normal user who asks siri a question and gets web answers wont think twice about it and they wont know that they would get better answers if they signed up for a service.
It is possible that something in the streaming contracts restricted access to the metadata for subscribers only, but that would be a bit odd. I think they just haven't gotten around to implementing a quality upsell there.
I am. It would make a lot more sense to answer questions based on the meta data and then tell the user that they can listen to the song or artist or whatever but they need to subscribe... it seems like a fantastic opportunity to upset the service. They are really missing out on a opportunity there. I suspect that in the future they will change that
The company will only be sued if the word gets out. You expect the employees to rock the boat for no reason? As long as the candidate is unaware of the bias nothing is ever likely to come of it.
It's still a stupid thing to say but if businesses were actually punished every time an employee did something stupid there wouldn't be any companies left.
My experience in n the states is that I can get an estimated fare but that I don't actually know the price until I arrive. Is it different in the UK? I'm surprised that they won this case though I am generally in favor of these services. It sure seems like a meter to me
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah but Bowie and his bad ass time tested contemporaries were well represented in the top 100 lists. That's a huge difference. Sure there was crap there too. There always is. But it used to be that the timeless stuff was there too. I suspect there is some on the top 100 now but it's not as prevalent meaning people need to dig deeper to find it and not everyone is interested in hunting down awesome music. Some don't even know how.
The fact that the Facebook app was written by 100 monkeys sitting at keyboards might have something to do with that.
True, but to some extent Lyft pushes a lot of the same laws people are talking about. Its not the grey area of the law stuff I am concerned with. You are absolutely right that their handling of things that the occasional bad driver does (theft or assault or discrimination) is totally awful and they by all accounts are a toxic company.
Lyft on the other hand has a fairly good reputation for treating drivers and customers fairly well and their service is every bit as convenient as UBER. I think if they were the leader in the market people would be much more positive about these services in general even if the pink mustache and fist bump are really stupid.
It really does depend though, if I'm just reading the news a web page is probably more than sufficient. I'm not sure that I need the CNN app to get a quality reading experience. I guess if I read all the CNN.com articles every day then maybe the app might be helpful, but I still just want to be able to read a news story on the web rather than downloading an app.
That said I think some categories are better in an app... shopping seems a bit nicer, things with heave interactions, games certainly... I think its a balance because if I just want to check something out I don't want to download an app for it, but when I shop on amazon on my phone I am more likely to use their app than the mobile web (or, more likely, I will wait till I am in front of a computer).
Not my experience at all. though I have had a few drivers with whom communication was a challenge the fact that I enter the destination address in the app mitigates that. The GPS on their phones gives them a quick route and I can review the route taken later... if someone is taking me for a literal and figurative ride then I would rate them very low which very quickly destroys their earnings potential with uber. Likely because of that I have never experienced a driver who took me on a significantly sub-optimal route.
They aren't a protected monopoly and they do have completion in many american cities. This is a much more open market than traditional taxies with number limited medallions that are traded around by rich cab company owners at exorbitant prices.
The people who run uber are total assholes its true but they are a huge step up from the traditional US taxi industry. That said, because I dislike them, their policies and their behaviors, I chose to use Lyft instead whenever possible. I would consider another competitor if one comes along as well.
Their location is tracked as is the fact that you summoned them for a ride. They may rob or rape you but they will probably get caught for it.
Cameras are not totally unreasonable though. Places may require them in an uber. Uber would resist for cost reasons but would probably rather operate in your country than avoid the cost of cameras and infrastructure.
Why not just slaves. The crew on the ground could have freed a group of Wookie slaves that come to the rescue after the emperors trap is sprung. They don't have to be primitive. They could be taking guns from the storm troopers as they kill them. Would have been epic.
That said I just rewatched Jedi and the woks aren't as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Still Wookie would be better.
Yeah, but if you crash your drone into something and abandon it nobody is ever going to find you. If the registration number is on the tail they can knock on your door. Thats the difference.
Sounds like a lot of rules and regulations to me... who is going to decide if the noise/smell from your neighboring property is too odious, who is going to approve the designs for these abatements. Maybe we should have the builders present plans to some kind of permitting or zoning board to approve them.
Oh good, I guess we don't have to do anything about this whole climate change thing then. You guys got this.
It could break crappy legacy software that businesses are running from the late 90s and setting up exceptions was considered too much work. This is Microsoft after all. Letting legacy software hold them back is pretty much what they do.
I totally agree. But when the decisions on purchasing are mostly made by the accounting department the needs of doctors falls by the wayside. After all this system costs money and billing is key (especially where insurance companies are involved.)
Sadly the customer isn't who you would expect it to be. The customer isn't the doctor or the nurse. The customer is the administrator and they want a cheep solution that gets them tax credits and makes billing easier, bringing in more money.
Companies that make software that is optimized for the end user (medical professionals) tends to be more expensive and has a harder time penetrating the market.
ICD9 codes are codes for problems, not measurements.
Lets say you come into the doctors office and you have a headache, or a stab wound, or a hernia. All 3 of those have distinct ICD9 codes. Mistyping the one for "headache" might give you the code for "stroke."
Certainly devices should go straight to the EHR, I used to work for the largest medical device manufactuerer in the US in a division that made an EHR, we spent a lot of time on that... it was a nice looking EHR with a slick interface but still had a ways to go in terms of functionality to be ready for primetime. The division was spun off and as far as I know the entier project was canceled (certainly the heavy integration with devices from the former parent company)
Just because it should be a particular way doesn't mean that it actually is.
Its not hard to move mass down a gravity well.
Musk has done neither. He isn't even directly involved with the people who are actually trying to see if this is technologically and economically viable. This is an old idea. It almost certainly could work but the engineering and economics are the hard part and musk has had nothing to do with those.
I just retired a 8 year old laptop that runs the most recent OS. How much support do you want?
The note resting thing here is that this seems like a reasonable place to use waterfall. Didgitize a bunch of forms that haven't changed in forever. Perfect. The requirements are fixed. They should be easy to understand. You can break the requirements down so you come up with a design for both the back and front end that works for every form/section/ question. Finally you code that up.
Done properly it could be modestly more efficient than agile for this type of project.
If the interviewer is worth their salt the idea usually isn't to see if you can get to the best possible, most efficient manner, but rather to see how you approach the problem. Do you solve the actual problem, are you good at understanding the implication of your design (figuring out what is slow or less than optimal about it, understanding the impact of set size on an performance). How do you approach optimizing the function you have created, are you stuck in one mindset or are you willing to pull back and try an entirely different approach to get a better result.
Some jobs require this kind of coding but you are right, most of the time you don't have to have the optimal solution, readability matters as well, usually more than ideal performance. Often that will come up as part of the discussion but for a lot of these problems, efficient solutions are often just as readable as the naive ones.
Its like someone who got their entire understanding of history from a mix of the bible and the manual to Civ II
No no. You have to do it like Linus to be effective. These gentle criticisms aren't going to cut it. Let me demonstrate
What the f$&@ is this sentence even supposed to mean? This is clearly written by a total idiot. What kind of total sh!&head would ever submit a sentence like this. Get your sh!& together and f$&@ing learn to write you worthless piece of crap.
See. That's the only way anyone learns
if that were the case they would be pushing the service as an upsell when siri answers your question. A normal user who asks siri a question and gets web answers wont think twice about it and they wont know that they would get better answers if they signed up for a service.
It is possible that something in the streaming contracts restricted access to the metadata for subscribers only, but that would be a bit odd. I think they just haven't gotten around to implementing a quality upsell there.
I am. It would make a lot more sense to answer questions based on the meta data and then tell the user that they can listen to the song or artist or whatever but they need to subscribe... it seems like a fantastic opportunity to upset the service. They are really missing out on a opportunity there. I suspect that in the future they will change that
The company will only be sued if the word gets out. You expect the employees to rock the boat for no reason? As long as the candidate is unaware of the bias nothing is ever likely to come of it.
It's still a stupid thing to say but if businesses were actually punished every time an employee did something stupid there wouldn't be any companies left.
My experience in n the states is that I can get an estimated fare but that I don't actually know the price until I arrive. Is it different in the UK? I'm surprised that they won this case though I am generally in favor of these services. It sure seems like a meter to me