To be honest, it kind of seems to make sense to have some kind of unified problem-reporting system. Who handles the problem in the end is a different matter.
You mean if someone needs support the request actually has to go in a queue with everyone else's? Mind blown.
Apparently you haven't seen these new job descriptions that are two pages long. Job Title is apparently meaningless because they just put down every job duty of like 3-4 different people these days.
This doesn't solve the root cause problem. The root cause problem is some people have addictive personality. Addictive personality in my estimation arises from an inability to cope with the anxieties of life and reality. Therefore the person turns to self medication. If it's not cigarettes, it'll be something else. If we addressed the root problem, the demand for these self medication "fixes" would reduce naturally.
If that was not your agenda, then you have failed.
Wow, nice Ad Hominem there. That will really boost your credibility. IANAL but I am speaking from experience with the legal system. If you don't like what I said then you are criticizing the legal system not me.
And under Copyright law there is a very good chance these would have been considered fair use.
If that's the case McMansion Hell could have made the case that the lawsuit was frivolous and requested attorney fees and possibly damages. I'm not sure why McMansion Hell would agree to settle in that case. I can only assume McMansion Hell and the EFF thought there was merit in Zillow's argument from a Copyright perspective.
what to do. That C&D had NO value for Zillow. Even if the blogger couldn't get help and just went away, what good would it have done?
Doesn't matter. Copyright Law is Copyright Law and copyright owners have a right to exercise their copy rights. If you don't like it, write your Senator(s) and/or Representative(s) for your state.
So they were using their lawyers to threaten the blogger under the assumption that the blogger wouldn't be able to afford to defend themselves (possibly knowing they were legally wrong).
Blogger gets free representation - and suddenly the who's right/wrong comes back into the equation and they withdraw (because they are good corporate citizens).
No... they effectively engaged in mediation and settled out of court. McMansion Hell agreed not to use the photos from Zillow going forward. Zillow decided not to pursue damages because it is significantly more difficult to meet the burden of proof that damages occurred and the EFF lawyers would very effectively argue that point vs. someone representing themselves.
Assuming they have such programs in your area. Otherwise you're SOL.
My power company does and they are in several states. It's worthwhile to look into it to see if yours does because it's an opportunity to make money off your renewable energy investment to pay for itself. You would be stupid not to investigate it unless you're not interested in making money, in which case, carry on.
Um, that's just stupid. You sell the extra power you generate back to the electric company! Look into the programs available from your local electric company for more information.
If you don't want to build a tree house, you will not even be able to do that. You'll deliver something that will kill your child because you deem it "good enough" if it stays up in the tree by itself if you don't give a shit about it.
Nice, but not very constructive. In my experience those who are aware of what I said test each piece of the treehouse as they go along to validate their assumptions. Whether it be software or building something in the physical world, I have always been able to create something that is structurally sound. Assuming that you can do this without any sort of verification or experience is asking for what you described.
WRONG. You have to be committed to making the software be able to do what you need it to do. That's the problem with young programmers these days. You think with the appropriate set of tools and academic reading you should be able to build the best tree house in the universe even when you've never built one before. Yeah...
How Silicon Valley Pushed Coding Into American Classrooms
Brilliant title. Silicon Valley which is located in the state of California in the United States of America manages to get coding into American Classrooms. Mind blown.
The funny thing is I've always appreciated the college educated for their perspective and it's always been a good symbiotic relationship.
It depends. Learning theory in a college course and practicing the actual trade are two different things. I think a lot of the more modern college courses work this into their curriculums better but when I was at a large university they sure didn't. That was okay for me, I had already programmed in all the languages they were teaching so what it did for me was fill in some knowledge gaps because we didn't have Google and Code School back in ye olden days. We had libraries that were limited. A lot of times you had to resort to hacking that is trying something seeing how the "thing" reacted and understand it through a feedback loop. This is something I find that's lacking in a lot of newer developers. They've been told oh use these patterns, interfaces, dependency injection and unit tests and yadda and you're guaranteed good, working software. WRONG. Some of them form dogmatic beliefs about this stuff before they're ever attempted to actual use what they've learned. Those things are all good tools but you have to use them right in the right context. That's something college doesn't teach you very well or it didn't when I attended at least. I'd say learning stuff academically whether self learning or attending lectures is valuable but if you try to put what you learn in practice, you're really missing out.
I don't have a college degree either but I got into this field in 1997 in the same way. I did attend college for almost 3 years though. I had been programming since a child and had been messing around with computer hardware as well. This is not a new thing. I have friends who did the same a LONG time ago.
The other thing is, this person's ability to tinker with computer assembly and a community college information technology course has little or no application to a role of Computer Security Analyst. I know about this, I've been in nearly every IT and Software Development role there is. When I was a Computer Science major there were also Information Technology roles and the like and those were for people who can't hack it in full on Computer Science. I have a close friend that was like this. He fully admits he couldn't hack it. Brilliant at Physics, not so much at Computer Science. So, he switched to Information Technology.
The other thing is, this problem of not hiring people has nothing to do with people lacking education credentials. People with Computer Science degrees can't find jobs. Today, many companies require ridiculous amounts of experience sometimes they even ask for more years of experience than a particular technology has existed. I do believe in many cases they make the requirements ridiculous just so they can whine and say they can't find "qualified candidates" and have to turn to H1-B Visa.
If we are going to talk about how to make more economic opportunity for people in this field, two things will make the most positive impact in this situation: 1) Companies revive the philosophy to hire smart people and provide on the job training that they might be missing for the company's particular technology preferences and 2) Shut down the unethical H1-B visa game by instituting better criteria and increasing oversight. For #1, I mean I don't understand. Let's take the NFL for example. Bill Parcells would go coach the worst team in the NFL, unlock their true potential and then make them Super Bowl winners. Why can't we do the same thing in this field and why shouldn't we?
Are they really graphics cards if you can't do graphics on it?
Graphics cards are different these days. They have APU's not GPU's now. Here's an article to get your familiar with these concepts: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/w...
This article is bullshit.
In the beginning it says:
Nvidia will release graphic cards specifically designed for cryptocurrency mining through its partners, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Name your source or it didn't happen. Then further down in the article it contradicts itself by saying:
Nvidia, AMD and ASUS have not officially announced the digital currency mining cards, according to their website press pages. It is not certain when the cards will be available for sale.
It also clearly says ASUS __ONLY__ has announced a specific card with this purpose in mine, specifically the MINING-P106-6G. The more logical explanation for this is that modern graphics cards contain APU's not GPU's that can be used for high speed general purpose computing like Physics calculations. We already know this. Because ASUS decided to use it for this purpose doesn't say anything about AMD or NVIDIA endorses this or created reference boards for this purpose. The article is clickbait GARBAGE! I'd be highly skeptical of CNBC for having poor journalism at this point.
You've pretty well described the pay-to-win model: design a game that is balanced for fun at the beginning long enough to get the player into it, and then slowly switch to a balance where the game is just boring grinding
Have you heard of Pokemon? This description goes well beyond the bounds of pay2win and existed long before the pay2win model existed. We can even go back to the days of the Apple IIe and C64 to see some real hardcore grinding like Might & Magic, Wizardry, Ultima, Bard's Tale and so forth. In those games, you had to take risks and might die over and over again and get set back while you were trying to grind. I'd love to see some of the gamers today try to play those games. They would probably just throw their devices out the window out of frustration.:) But you see... those of us that were persistent got to feel very satisfied about their achievements.
but I got to the point where it was near-impossible to do anything without massive amounts of grinding
That's key. If you don't like grinding you won't like a TON of games. You won't like World of Warcraft or any MMO really, you won't like Pokemon, Final Fantasy or JRPG's. You won't like Rogue-like's most likely either. Tons of games have a grinding component. Like I said, we need someone who is in the target demographic to speak to this and they probably won't because well it's probably embarrassing.:D
But that's all irrelevant to what I was saying. Do you go into a discussion viewing the other people as enemies or opponents, people you are trying to "defeat"?
Now you're making assumptions about me based on things I didn't say and therefore are not being rational and thus we cannot have a rational conversation. Cheers!
I've seen some games like that. Most other players either lose interest or stop looking at the leader board. You end up needing those hyper competitive players because nobody else is going to spend money on the game. Of course, I've seen games without them and those end up folding within a year or two because even when you can make it to the top of the leaderboard without spending lots of money, people still won't pay any money. So you're really just competing for a small number of compulsive players/gamblers.
Take a look at Star Trek Timelines. It's especially appropriate for the Slashdot crowd. In fact, I wonder if any of them will admit how much they spend publicly on the events.;) Disruptor Beam has a cash cow.
I still don't get it. Most applications I use are free, and even for some I don't see a need for an "App". Most of the time the mobile-aware (or responsive design) websites work just fine. Except the m.slashdot.org thing, I could probably write 10 bug reports just by thinking of it. Luckily, you can tell it to load the desktop site. For most stuff the mobile website is just fine. I even use Facebooks mobile site, because I ditched their app it after the split of their core app and messenger. Never looked back. Works wonderfully.
How do you make money on apps? The only thing I can see, is selling your App-writing skills to a big company, which then distributes it for free to the end-user.
There are several ways to make money for mobile apps and games:
- Ads, many free games/apps have banner ads, full screen ads periodically. Some games are doing things like get this temporary boost if you watch a quick 30 second ad. It's quite clever.
- Pay 2 Win games - You'd be surprised how competitive some games are that have leader boards. Some people pour obscene amounts of money into the game just to get #1 and be like "Look at me!"
- Many mobile apps are very cheap usually <$5, many $0.99. This leads to eh, it's only $.99 big deal, CLICK!
- Some apps just get really popular socially and offer additional content to be purchased in the "free" version. Your friend is like "oh I have this and you don't". Since you don't have it, you buy that $.99 add-on content so you don't feel left out.
There are a lot of revenue streams you can tap into with mobile apps if you know what you're doing. They might be relatively small but if you get enough users, it adds up. If none of these sound compelling to you, you're probably not in the target demographic.:)
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, it kind of seems to make sense to have some kind of unified problem-reporting system. Who handles the problem in the end is a different matter.
You mean if someone needs support the request actually has to go in a queue with everyone else's? Mind blown.
Apparently you haven't seen these new job descriptions that are two pages long. Job Title is apparently meaningless because they just put down every job duty of like 3-4 different people these days.
Janus was the two-faced god One face is the problems, one face is the solutions.
Sell me this pen. "See what he did there? He's creating demand."
If we addressed the root problem,
the root problem is people dying from inhaling too much cigarette smoke
Let's try the 5 why's technique (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Whys):
- Why are cigarette smokers dying? From inhaling too much cigarette smoke
- Why do they decide to smoke to begin with?
That's how root cause analysis works. Get jiggy with it and you might actually solve some real problems.
This doesn't solve the root cause problem. The root cause problem is some people have addictive personality. Addictive personality in my estimation arises from an inability to cope with the anxieties of life and reality. Therefore the person turns to self medication. If it's not cigarettes, it'll be something else. If we addressed the root problem, the demand for these self medication "fixes" would reduce naturally.
I can only ASS-ume ...
Yes. You have indeed made an ass of yourself.
If that was not your agenda, then you have failed.
Wow, nice Ad Hominem there. That will really boost your credibility. IANAL but I am speaking from experience with the legal system. If you don't like what I said then you are criticizing the legal system not me.
As an anti-terrorism measure! ;)
And under Copyright law there is a very good chance these would have been considered fair use.
If that's the case McMansion Hell could have made the case that the lawsuit was frivolous and requested attorney fees and possibly damages. I'm not sure why McMansion Hell would agree to settle in that case. I can only assume McMansion Hell and the EFF thought there was merit in Zillow's argument from a Copyright perspective.
what to do. That C&D had NO value for Zillow. Even if the blogger couldn't get help and just went away, what good would it have done?
Doesn't matter. Copyright Law is Copyright Law and copyright owners have a right to exercise their copy rights. If you don't like it, write your Senator(s) and/or Representative(s) for your state.
So they were using their lawyers to threaten the blogger under the assumption that the blogger wouldn't be able to afford to defend themselves (possibly knowing they were legally wrong). Blogger gets free representation - and suddenly the who's right/wrong comes back into the equation and they withdraw (because they are good corporate citizens).
No... they effectively engaged in mediation and settled out of court. McMansion Hell agreed not to use the photos from Zillow going forward. Zillow decided not to pursue damages because it is significantly more difficult to meet the burden of proof that damages occurred and the EFF lawyers would very effectively argue that point vs. someone representing themselves.
Assuming they have such programs in your area. Otherwise you're SOL.
My power company does and they are in several states. It's worthwhile to look into it to see if yours does because it's an opportunity to make money off your renewable energy investment to pay for itself. You would be stupid not to investigate it unless you're not interested in making money, in which case, carry on.
Um, that's just stupid. You sell the extra power you generate back to the electric company! Look into the programs available from your local electric company for more information.
If you don't want to build a tree house, you will not even be able to do that. You'll deliver something that will kill your child because you deem it "good enough" if it stays up in the tree by itself if you don't give a shit about it.
Nice, but not very constructive. In my experience those who are aware of what I said test each piece of the treehouse as they go along to validate their assumptions. Whether it be software or building something in the physical world, I have always been able to create something that is structurally sound. Assuming that you can do this without any sort of verification or experience is asking for what you described.
You have to want to program to do it right.
WRONG. You have to be committed to making the software be able to do what you need it to do. That's the problem with young programmers these days. You think with the appropriate set of tools and academic reading you should be able to build the best tree house in the universe even when you've never built one before. Yeah...
How Silicon Valley Pushed Coding Into American Classrooms
Brilliant title. Silicon Valley which is located in the state of California in the United States of America manages to get coding into American Classrooms. Mind blown.
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/...
The funny thing is I've always appreciated the college educated for their perspective and it's always been a good symbiotic relationship.
It depends. Learning theory in a college course and practicing the actual trade are two different things. I think a lot of the more modern college courses work this into their curriculums better but when I was at a large university they sure didn't. That was okay for me, I had already programmed in all the languages they were teaching so what it did for me was fill in some knowledge gaps because we didn't have Google and Code School back in ye olden days. We had libraries that were limited. A lot of times you had to resort to hacking that is trying something seeing how the "thing" reacted and understand it through a feedback loop. This is something I find that's lacking in a lot of newer developers. They've been told oh use these patterns, interfaces, dependency injection and unit tests and yadda and you're guaranteed good, working software. WRONG. Some of them form dogmatic beliefs about this stuff before they're ever attempted to actual use what they've learned. Those things are all good tools but you have to use them right in the right context. That's something college doesn't teach you very well or it didn't when I attended at least. I'd say learning stuff academically whether self learning or attending lectures is valuable but if you try to put what you learn in practice, you're really missing out.
I don't have a college degree either but I got into this field in 1997 in the same way. I did attend college for almost 3 years though. I had been programming since a child and had been messing around with computer hardware as well. This is not a new thing. I have friends who did the same a LONG time ago.
The other thing is, this person's ability to tinker with computer assembly and a community college information technology course has little or no application to a role of Computer Security Analyst. I know about this, I've been in nearly every IT and Software Development role there is. When I was a Computer Science major there were also Information Technology roles and the like and those were for people who can't hack it in full on Computer Science. I have a close friend that was like this. He fully admits he couldn't hack it. Brilliant at Physics, not so much at Computer Science. So, he switched to Information Technology.
The other thing is, this problem of not hiring people has nothing to do with people lacking education credentials. People with Computer Science degrees can't find jobs. Today, many companies require ridiculous amounts of experience sometimes they even ask for more years of experience than a particular technology has existed. I do believe in many cases they make the requirements ridiculous just so they can whine and say they can't find "qualified candidates" and have to turn to H1-B Visa.
If we are going to talk about how to make more economic opportunity for people in this field, two things will make the most positive impact in this situation: 1) Companies revive the philosophy to hire smart people and provide on the job training that they might be missing for the company's particular technology preferences and 2) Shut down the unethical H1-B visa game by instituting better criteria and increasing oversight. For #1, I mean I don't understand. Let's take the NFL for example. Bill Parcells would go coach the worst team in the NFL, unlock their true potential and then make them Super Bowl winners. Why can't we do the same thing in this field and why shouldn't we?
Are they really graphics cards if you can't do graphics on it?
Graphics cards are different these days. They have APU's not GPU's now. Here's an article to get your familiar with these concepts: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/w...
Nvidia will release graphic cards specifically designed for cryptocurrency mining through its partners, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Name your source or it didn't happen. Then further down in the article it contradicts itself by saying:
Nvidia, AMD and ASUS have not officially announced the digital currency mining cards, according to their website press pages. It is not certain when the cards will be available for sale.
It also clearly says ASUS __ONLY__ has announced a specific card with this purpose in mine, specifically the MINING-P106-6G. The more logical explanation for this is that modern graphics cards contain APU's not GPU's that can be used for high speed general purpose computing like Physics calculations. We already know this. Because ASUS decided to use it for this purpose doesn't say anything about AMD or NVIDIA endorses this or created reference boards for this purpose. The article is clickbait GARBAGE! I'd be highly skeptical of CNBC for having poor journalism at this point.
You've pretty well described the pay-to-win model: design a game that is balanced for fun at the beginning long enough to get the player into it, and then slowly switch to a balance where the game is just boring grinding
Have you heard of Pokemon? This description goes well beyond the bounds of pay2win and existed long before the pay2win model existed. We can even go back to the days of the Apple IIe and C64 to see some real hardcore grinding like Might & Magic, Wizardry, Ultima, Bard's Tale and so forth. In those games, you had to take risks and might die over and over again and get set back while you were trying to grind. I'd love to see some of the gamers today try to play those games. They would probably just throw their devices out the window out of frustration. :) But you see... those of us that were persistent got to feel very satisfied about their achievements.
but I got to the point where it was near-impossible to do anything without massive amounts of grinding
That's key. If you don't like grinding you won't like a TON of games. You won't like World of Warcraft or any MMO really, you won't like Pokemon, Final Fantasy or JRPG's. You won't like Rogue-like's most likely either. Tons of games have a grinding component. Like I said, we need someone who is in the target demographic to speak to this and they probably won't because well it's probably embarrassing. :D
But that's all irrelevant to what I was saying. Do you go into a discussion viewing the other people as enemies or opponents, people you are trying to "defeat"?
Now you're making assumptions about me based on things I didn't say and therefore are not being rational and thus we cannot have a rational conversation. Cheers!
I've seen some games like that. Most other players either lose interest or stop looking at the leader board. You end up needing those hyper competitive players because nobody else is going to spend money on the game. Of course, I've seen games without them and those end up folding within a year or two because even when you can make it to the top of the leaderboard without spending lots of money, people still won't pay any money. So you're really just competing for a small number of compulsive players/gamblers.
Take a look at Star Trek Timelines. It's especially appropriate for the Slashdot crowd. In fact, I wonder if any of them will admit how much they spend publicly on the events. ;) Disruptor Beam has a cash cow.
I still don't get it. Most applications I use are free, and even for some I don't see a need for an "App". Most of the time the mobile-aware (or responsive design) websites work just fine. Except the m.slashdot.org thing, I could probably write 10 bug reports just by thinking of it. Luckily, you can tell it to load the desktop site. For most stuff the mobile website is just fine. I even use Facebooks mobile site, because I ditched their app it after the split of their core app and messenger. Never looked back. Works wonderfully.
How do you make money on apps? The only thing I can see, is selling your App-writing skills to a big company, which then distributes it for free to the end-user.
There are several ways to make money for mobile apps and games:
There are a lot of revenue streams you can tap into with mobile apps if you know what you're doing. They might be relatively small but if you get enough users, it adds up. If none of these sound compelling to you, you're probably not in the target demographic. :)