I wasn't aware Tomcat could now run JSF. Is this true? Tomcat has been irrelevant to me for the last 8 or so years. Back then it was only a servlet container with a funky database connection pool.
Totally true, it just doesn't run it out of box. You need to include the jars and dependency jars in your WEB-INF/libs. In fact the beauty of Tomcat in my opinion is that the default install is so Vanilla, that as an application developer I know to include everything I need and it will consistently run the same and look the same. Other application servers like JBoss, WebLogic, and Glassfish that come prebundled with a number of frameworks and tools can look and act slightly different for the same web application.
Further still, I included Quartz, which is a Java library for running cron jobs on a servlet container. Utilizing Quartz in my web application means that I do not even need more advanced Java EE functionality that are typically the domain of the enterprise application servers.
No. We think they should have applied themselves while in school and gotten themselves a half decent trade or profession. Also we think that they would do well to escape from the general anti-intellectual attitude in the US especially when it comes to math.
Not understanding numbers is as harmful as not being able to read.
Just think, if all the poor and disadvantaged had followed that gem of advice then the job market would be so flooded with engineers that you would be lucky to be making $10/hr writing software.
Modern technological innovations and efficiency are such that it is not necessary for a vast majority of the people to work for a booming and functioning economy. Look at the millions of starving educated Indians for an example of what I am talking about.
You are full of shit, and probably not any sort of a coder.
I am sure he is some sort of coder, just probably the worst possible kind of coder. You know the one that does everything his/her way without regards to standards or consistency, ignores design documents because he/she thinks they are stupid, has an ego the size of Alaska and takes personal offense about every little thing brought up in a code review.
It is okay though, because as long as these guys write shitty webapps then there will always be job security for guys like us to clean up the mess.
A quick Google search turned up two such shared Tomcat hosting providers with full MySQL backend databases.
http://javaservlethosting.com/index.jshhttp://www.hostjava.net/
With Tomcat 6 I can run the latest versions of JSF, Spring, and Hibernate (which can be configured for MySQL easily). It is reasonably cheap too, not quite as cheap as a PHP hosting provider, but still affordable, and much cheaper than leasing a VPS.
What is it with the JS on the server crowd on Slashdot? I have to admit that I have respect for anyone that can take a toaster and turn it into a microwave. It is a feat worthy of praise, however it doesn't mean that it should be done.
You just went full troll... The fact that you got modded +5 makes me lose all faith in the Slashdot community moderation process.
Somebody who doesn't clearly understand the importance of frameworks, detailed scalable software designs, enterprise level consistency, and maintainable code that is appropriately decoupled and unit tested, is somebody who shouldn't be writing software of any kind. Oh and if given the chance I would very willingly share with you some of my source code, because I am a nice guy and would like for you to learn something about software development in corporate environments.
PHP is just fine. There's nothing wrong with PHP at all and it powers some of the largest sites on the internet. If you want something slow and awkward, choose Java just like all of the banking websites use.
There is a significant difference between Java and the Java EE stack, and just because banks write slow software doesn't mean that Java is inherently a slow language. The JVM is rather optimized and in many cases runs comparably if not more efficiently than similar C++ code.
Further, the vast array of frameworks and libraries available give an immense range of choices that allow for efficient, scalable, maintainable and unit tested code to be written rapidly. If you hate the verboseness of Java and wish to use a more modern language, there are a number of newer languages available that all compile to JVM byte code and run on top of the byte code, Scala comes to mind.
I wish I had mod points to mod this up. Everything about going with Java/Hibernate/Spring/Easy Mock (or Mockito) lends itself towards steering developers to writing scalable, loosely coupled, highly cohesive, unit tested applications. With that being said, you can lead a horse to water...
The fundamental problem with PHP is that it is TOO EASY to get started, so right off the bat you are encouraged to develop for immediate gratfication and not for scalability or maintainability. Also this attracts a subset of developers who suck at writing quality software, the mouthbreathers that hurr-durr when you ask them about using mocking in their unit tests on an interview.
There are smart PHP developers out there who do things right, but the bad ones give them an unfortunate prejudicial repuation that can be hard to shake.
Just of the top of my head I can think of books like "Little Women" or "Jane Eyre" that happen about 150 years ago, where women are already able to work and support themselves, even if society is still not accepting it as "normal".
That is precisely my point though, society hardly accepted it as normal until fairly recently. Many of these working women were looked on with pity if they came from advantage and never married as evidenced in books by Jane Austen et al. Certainly women that were married were not expected to work. As always the working poor did what they needed to do to survive and were looked on with derision regardless of gender.
130 years ago, women were already accepted as university graduate students in the US.
You mean like finishing schools that rich families would send their daughters to until a man came about and married them? Other than being a teacher, far too little women were able to hurdle the enormous difficulties in getting accepted to notable schools and becoming working professionals. 75 years is an appropriate and generous guess for when women really could compete fairly with male counterparts.
You describe how marriage was handled among nobility in Europe. That DOESN'T mean that marriage was handled the same way everywhere, for the "common folk", as you say. Maybe you are referring only to big weddings, and you are most probably forgetting what is called "Common law Marriage".
I apologize if my post came off as me being apologetic to people and cultures that abuse women. That was not my intent. I was merely trying to point out that the parents claims of the grandparents mysogyny were unfounded. My impression from LostMyBeaver is that he was just stating the way marriages and life for a woman and man really was barely a hundred years ago. My intent was to point out just how brief womens liberation has really been compared to the thousands of years of known human civilization.
I find your comment completely misogynist and dumb.
Even if marriage WAS designed to protect women in the past, it doesn't mean that it cannot get a new significance with new times.
I don't think most women truly understand that the concept of a woman being able to take care of herself and her children without resorting to prostitution as a relatively recent societal construct. It has only been in the past 75 years (generously) that women could arguably do fine without a man. It has only been in the past 200 or so that women could even hold an income earning job without being a pariah. In the past millenium since they were even legally allowed to own property in most human civilizations.
It is actually only a fairly recent concept that marriage occurred with common folk. Long ago a marriage was a legal binding to join families and protect wealth through marital inheritance. The sexual consumation aspect of it was one in which a marriage was arranged with the anticipation that a valid heir be produced to inherit said wealth in the event of the parents untimely demise. Note that sexual monogomy was originally only a constraint imposed on women, and that was to ensure the sire of any offspring the woman produces. Men had no such constraints.
Even in many countries today a man caught being unfaithful is punished with a fine while a woman being unfaithful is punished with death. This isn't mysogynistic, this is reality.
Does fast food really make dumb people dumber, or is it just that naturally dumb people tend to make poor lifestyle choices and partake of unhealthy foods more readily? The same can probably be said of intelligent people and eating more nutrient and vitamin rich foods.
... Ya ya I know, Correlation != causation (Insert generic mod point attracting Slashdot meme here)
Sure it's possible, because ANYTHING is possible. What's lacking is any form of actual hard science to back the theory up. All I see is fabricated data and corrupt models promulgated by politicians in the name of more control.
Thats all you see because the few isolated incidents of numbers fudging by a single unethical scientist are ridiculously overblown in the media to the point where everybody walks away with the impression that they are all a bunch of scam artists. I got news for you, government isn't an entity out to control you for mysterious reasons. Government is a MEANS to control you through the wealthy, the true holders of power.
Do you really think it is all a giant conspiracy by a former vice-president and some small environmental activist groups, or more likely a government being controlled by wealthy individuals to protect their financial interests while taking away your freedoms? Come on, use some common fucking sense.
Global warming doesn't preclude local cooling. In fact, it's a natural consequence as weather patterns change.
Maybe, maybe not. In any case, do you have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell me? If so I'll just hand over my checkbook to you right now. Do you get my point? Or should I sledgehammer it home? In otherwords, whats your evidence for that statement? I'm not ready to take 5 steps backwards economically becuase you and your friends have fears with regards to this supposed phenomena. Even if the the world's climate were warming, you have no evidence to support that it is more than a perodic aberration.
You are actively admitting that you have a financial incentive as an individual for man-made climate change to be untrue. You are also likely not a climate scientist that has a lab and funding to where you can perform your own experiments trying to discover the truth for yourself, therefore you must accept a conclusion derived by experts in the field that have the means to perform these experiments and publicly disclosed their evidence for their conclusions in scientific journals.
So despite the vast array of evidence from independent research, versus the much smaller subset of contrary evidence from research known to be funded by individuals and entities who also have a direct financial incentive for this to be untrue, you choose to accept the latter. I am okay with you disagreeing in man-made climate change in this case as long as your truthful with yourself and others about your vested interests coincidentally being aligned with your viewpoints.
Nobody is seriously stating that global warming research should not be held to scientific scrutiny. The only people making that baseless accusation are the people who actively deny it, usually for political or financial reasons.
My problem with the naysayers is that they consistently make broad sweeping claims without backing up their claims with results from independent peer reviewed studies that HAVE NOT BEEN FUNDED BY SPECIAL INTERESTS. They also consistently and embarassingly rehash tired strawman arguments on isolated incidents (Eg. One unethical scientist fudging data) or a couple of questionable inputs (Eg. A few subsets of input data that may not be completely accurate). These aren't the actions of a scientist seriously trying to reproduce experiments and legitimately test real theories on climate change, these are the typical actions of a defense lawyer trying to spread confusion and cast doubt in the face of hard concrete evidence.
Further still you accuse climate change scientists from having an agenda and predetermining their own conclusions? Do you get this from one bad apple in the bunch? Of course they have a preconceived notion of what the truth is, its called a hypothesis, which is exactly what the experiments aim to prove.
I don't like bullies, especially those that take marching orders from their messianic right-wing talking heads.
Managers tend to (and need to) know different things than plain IT workers
What a manager needs to know is incredibly simple, at least in my mind. That is not what seperates a good manager from a plain IT worker. What most plain IT workers do not want and can't handle is the stress of ownership. An IT manager has to own the system, project, or team and be accountable for failures that go along with it. I would know, I am in such a position right now. It is tough burden to carry. Bad managers will either sweep problems under the rug hoping to save their image, blame and punish subordinates for their own failings and bad decisions, or they simply are entrenched and never get held accountable for demonstrably bad judgement.
If he does only what you describe in your rant, the company will fail and whether you believe it or not, the majority of companies tend to avoid ridiculously stupid promotion and hiring decisions.
Typical Randian Fallacy. Ridiculously stupid promotions and hiring decisions are only avoided if the manager above the bad manager is also NOT a bad manager. You would know how rampant this problem actually is if you actually worked in corporate culture for an extended period of time.
People make bad irrational decisions that go against their self interest all the time. The Randian Fallacy is assuming that the majority of people make rational decisions that are in their self interest. They don't. Furthermore bad management and irrational decisions do not necessarily doom a company to failure. Sometimes signing a lucrative contract in a niche market with negligible competition allows companies to make idiotic and catastrophically poor decisions and still come out ahead despite being mismanaged. Sure they could be EVEN MORE successful if they were ran correctly, however the bottom line is they still turn a profit and shareholders are happy. Again this is yet another rampant problem in the industry that you should already know about. Seeing as how you demonstrably have never experienced this, you must be extraordinarily lucky working for nothing but great companies.
I completely agree that IT people need to do a MUCH better job of communicating to non-technical people, but you have to understand how overworked and stretched thin these guys can be. On top of 50-60 hr work weeks, most are on call 24/7 and get woken up in the middle of the night from time to time. Even if your pager doesn't go off, you still have the stress of worrying if you are going to be spending Christmas Eve with your wife on the couch by the fire, or if you are going to be interupted by a page.
Further still if you are out of the house you will constantly worry about how quickly you can access a computer from any given point if you are paged. So please, take your complaints to management if IT doesn't have the time to give you more than a 1 sentence answer. They were the ones who slashed budgets so they could get their big bonus checks after all.
So much of their life is hidden under a bushel because they don't discuss things, they don't divulge what they know
Is it that they are not divulging what they know and witholding secrets?... Or is it that they just don't really know anything? Think about it.
In IT, the knowledgable ones never get promoted because funding is slashed to the point where the handful of guys remaining are doing x3 the work they used to, and now they are knowledgable and indispensable in their current roles. In todays world, knowing nothing but how to BS, deceive others, getting an MBA online and being a sociopathic asshole is the only fast track to IT management.
Science helps to uncover the deep truths of reality, and we all know that our Neo-Conservative overlords will never support that which brings truth to light...
Reality after all has a clear liberal bias.
You're like the hardline conservative male politicians in America who rally against homosexuality in public, but then enjoy blowjobs from anonymous men in airport washrooms.
Yes because rallying against racism is what comes to mind when thinking about hardline conservative male politicians...
I stand by what I said, because I have seen real racism against an entire people because of corporate decisions from assclowns that have wet dreams about outsourcing as much software development as possible to third world countries. My neighbor runs a small website that he farms all the development work out to Vietnam. You should hear how he talks about these poor saps like he is doing them this huge favor for paying them essentially $4/hr.
"Oh yessa massa! I sho is grateful!"
It is slavery out and out.
Where the fuck do you live that you run into juniors expecting 100k? The juniors I see would be happy with 45k a year and not being dumped on by superiors and bean counters that contribute NOTHING!
Do you know how disillusioning it is to join a team as a developer with less than 3 years of experience, and to work for a bunch of guys who literally dick around on the internet all day and make 3 times their salary? Then they get talked down to, asked to work overtime, get ignored, and not appreciated. It is no wonder they leave.
Do you realize how racist that sounds? Everybody you claim to be a good programmer is essentially from a predominantly Caucasian country.
Third world countries have poor schools, desperate people who lie on resumes to get jobs they are not qualified for, and scummy managers who exploit big money contracts and give cheap subpar talent. It has absolutely nothing to do with people in Third World countries being poor programmers in general. They are just being exploited.
When one thinks of NYC, the same stirrings of exciting bleeding edge technological progress does not come to mind as say, Palo Alto. People think about scummy hedge funds and ridiculous cost of living. Try making it in NYC or Boston with less than 50k a year. It's not fun.
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't aware Tomcat could now run JSF. Is this true? Tomcat has been irrelevant to me for the last 8 or so years. Back then it was only a servlet container with a funky database connection pool.
Totally true, it just doesn't run it out of box. You need to include the jars and dependency jars in your WEB-INF/libs. In fact the beauty of Tomcat in my opinion is that the default install is so Vanilla, that as an application developer I know to include everything I need and it will consistently run the same and look the same. Other application servers like JBoss, WebLogic, and Glassfish that come prebundled with a number of frameworks and tools can look and act slightly different for the same web application.
Further still, I included Quartz, which is a Java library for running cron jobs on a servlet container. Utilizing Quartz in my web application means that I do not even need more advanced Java EE functionality that are typically the domain of the enterprise application servers.
No. We think they should have applied themselves while in school and gotten themselves a half decent trade or profession. Also we think that they would do well to escape from the general anti-intellectual attitude in the US especially when it comes to math.
Not understanding numbers is as harmful as not being able to read.
Just think, if all the poor and disadvantaged had followed that gem of advice then the job market would be so flooded with engineers that you would be lucky to be making $10/hr writing software.
Modern technological innovations and efficiency are such that it is not necessary for a vast majority of the people to work for a booming and functioning economy. Look at the millions of starving educated Indians for an example of what I am talking about.
Truth is, truth is, truth is
You are full of shit, and probably not any sort of a coder.
I am sure he is some sort of coder, just probably the worst possible kind of coder. You know the one that does everything his/her way without regards to standards or consistency, ignores design documents because he/she thinks they are stupid, has an ego the size of Alaska and takes personal offense about every little thing brought up in a code review.
It is okay though, because as long as these guys write shitty webapps then there will always be job security for guys like us to clean up the mess.
A quick Google search turned up two such shared Tomcat hosting providers with full MySQL backend databases. http://javaservlethosting.com/index.jsh http://www.hostjava.net/ With Tomcat 6 I can run the latest versions of JSF, Spring, and Hibernate (which can be configured for MySQL easily). It is reasonably cheap too, not quite as cheap as a PHP hosting provider, but still affordable, and much cheaper than leasing a VPS.
What is it with the JS on the server crowd on Slashdot? I have to admit that I have respect for anyone that can take a toaster and turn it into a microwave. It is a feat worthy of praise, however it doesn't mean that it should be done.
You just went full troll... The fact that you got modded +5 makes me lose all faith in the Slashdot community moderation process.
Somebody who doesn't clearly understand the importance of frameworks, detailed scalable software designs, enterprise level consistency, and maintainable code that is appropriately decoupled and unit tested, is somebody who shouldn't be writing software of any kind. Oh and if given the chance I would very willingly share with you some of my source code, because I am a nice guy and would like for you to learn something about software development in corporate environments.
PHP is just fine. There's nothing wrong with PHP at all and it powers some of the largest sites on the internet. If you want something slow and awkward, choose Java just like all of the banking websites use.
There is a significant difference between Java and the Java EE stack, and just because banks write slow software doesn't mean that Java is inherently a slow language. The JVM is rather optimized and in many cases runs comparably if not more efficiently than similar C++ code.
Further, the vast array of frameworks and libraries available give an immense range of choices that allow for efficient, scalable, maintainable and unit tested code to be written rapidly. If you hate the verboseness of Java and wish to use a more modern language, there are a number of newer languages available that all compile to JVM byte code and run on top of the byte code, Scala comes to mind.
I wish I had mod points to mod this up. Everything about going with Java/Hibernate/Spring/Easy Mock (or Mockito) lends itself towards steering developers to writing scalable, loosely coupled, highly cohesive, unit tested applications. With that being said, you can lead a horse to water... The fundamental problem with PHP is that it is TOO EASY to get started, so right off the bat you are encouraged to develop for immediate gratfication and not for scalability or maintainability. Also this attracts a subset of developers who suck at writing quality software, the mouthbreathers that hurr-durr when you ask them about using mocking in their unit tests on an interview. There are smart PHP developers out there who do things right, but the bad ones give them an unfortunate prejudicial repuation that can be hard to shake.
Just of the top of my head I can think of books like "Little Women" or "Jane Eyre" that happen about 150 years ago, where women are already able to work and support themselves, even if society is still not accepting it as "normal".
That is precisely my point though, society hardly accepted it as normal until fairly recently. Many of these working women were looked on with pity if they came from advantage and never married as evidenced in books by Jane Austen et al. Certainly women that were married were not expected to work. As always the working poor did what they needed to do to survive and were looked on with derision regardless of gender.
130 years ago, women were already accepted as university graduate students in the US.
You mean like finishing schools that rich families would send their daughters to until a man came about and married them? Other than being a teacher, far too little women were able to hurdle the enormous difficulties in getting accepted to notable schools and becoming working professionals. 75 years is an appropriate and generous guess for when women really could compete fairly with male counterparts.
You describe how marriage was handled among nobility in Europe. That DOESN'T mean that marriage was handled the same way everywhere, for the "common folk", as you say. Maybe you are referring only to big weddings, and you are most probably forgetting what is called "Common law Marriage".
That is indeed what I was referring to.
I apologize if my post came off as me being apologetic to people and cultures that abuse women. That was not my intent. I was merely trying to point out that the parents claims of the grandparents mysogyny were unfounded. My impression from LostMyBeaver is that he was just stating the way marriages and life for a woman and man really was barely a hundred years ago. My intent was to point out just how brief womens liberation has really been compared to the thousands of years of known human civilization.
I'd hate to be a lefty because I can't imagine trying to live with such a low opinion of the human race.
I'd hate to be a righty, because I can't imagine trying to live in such denial of the sobering facts of reality.
I find your comment completely misogynist and dumb.
Even if marriage WAS designed to protect women in the past, it doesn't mean that it cannot get a new significance with new times.
I don't think most women truly understand that the concept of a woman being able to take care of herself and her children without resorting to prostitution as a relatively recent societal construct. It has only been in the past 75 years (generously) that women could arguably do fine without a man. It has only been in the past 200 or so that women could even hold an income earning job without being a pariah. In the past millenium since they were even legally allowed to own property in most human civilizations.
It is actually only a fairly recent concept that marriage occurred with common folk. Long ago a marriage was a legal binding to join families and protect wealth through marital inheritance. The sexual consumation aspect of it was one in which a marriage was arranged with the anticipation that a valid heir be produced to inherit said wealth in the event of the parents untimely demise. Note that sexual monogomy was originally only a constraint imposed on women, and that was to ensure the sire of any offspring the woman produces. Men had no such constraints.
Even in many countries today a man caught being unfaithful is punished with a fine while a woman being unfaithful is punished with death. This isn't mysogynistic, this is reality.
Does fast food really make dumb people dumber, or is it just that naturally dumb people tend to make poor lifestyle choices and partake of unhealthy foods more readily? The same can probably be said of intelligent people and eating more nutrient and vitamin rich foods.
... Ya ya I know, Correlation != causation (Insert generic mod point attracting Slashdot meme here)
Sure it's possible, because ANYTHING is possible. What's lacking is any form of actual hard science to back the theory up. All I see is fabricated data and corrupt models promulgated by politicians in the name of more control.
Thats all you see because the few isolated incidents of numbers fudging by a single unethical scientist are ridiculously overblown in the media to the point where everybody walks away with the impression that they are all a bunch of scam artists. I got news for you, government isn't an entity out to control you for mysterious reasons. Government is a MEANS to control you through the wealthy, the true holders of power.
Do you really think it is all a giant conspiracy by a former vice-president and some small environmental activist groups, or more likely a government being controlled by wealthy individuals to protect their financial interests while taking away your freedoms? Come on, use some common fucking sense.
Global warming doesn't preclude local cooling. In fact, it's a natural consequence as weather patterns change.
Maybe, maybe not. In any case, do you have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell me? If so I'll just hand over my checkbook to you right now. Do you get my point? Or should I sledgehammer it home? In otherwords, whats your evidence for that statement? I'm not ready to take 5 steps backwards economically becuase you and your friends have fears with regards to this supposed phenomena. Even if the the world's climate were warming, you have no evidence to support that it is more than a perodic aberration.
You are actively admitting that you have a financial incentive as an individual for man-made climate change to be untrue. You are also likely not a climate scientist that has a lab and funding to where you can perform your own experiments trying to discover the truth for yourself, therefore you must accept a conclusion derived by experts in the field that have the means to perform these experiments and publicly disclosed their evidence for their conclusions in scientific journals.
So despite the vast array of evidence from independent research, versus the much smaller subset of contrary evidence from research known to be funded by individuals and entities who also have a direct financial incentive for this to be untrue, you choose to accept the latter. I am okay with you disagreeing in man-made climate change in this case as long as your truthful with yourself and others about your vested interests coincidentally being aligned with your viewpoints.
Do you get my point?
Nobody is seriously stating that global warming research should not be held to scientific scrutiny. The only people making that baseless accusation are the people who actively deny it, usually for political or financial reasons.
My problem with the naysayers is that they consistently make broad sweeping claims without backing up their claims with results from independent peer reviewed studies that HAVE NOT BEEN FUNDED BY SPECIAL INTERESTS. They also consistently and embarassingly rehash tired strawman arguments on isolated incidents (Eg. One unethical scientist fudging data) or a couple of questionable inputs (Eg. A few subsets of input data that may not be completely accurate). These aren't the actions of a scientist seriously trying to reproduce experiments and legitimately test real theories on climate change, these are the typical actions of a defense lawyer trying to spread confusion and cast doubt in the face of hard concrete evidence.
Further still you accuse climate change scientists from having an agenda and predetermining their own conclusions? Do you get this from one bad apple in the bunch? Of course they have a preconceived notion of what the truth is, its called a hypothesis, which is exactly what the experiments aim to prove.
I don't like bullies, especially those that take marching orders from their messianic right-wing talking heads.
Managers tend to (and need to) know different things than plain IT workers
What a manager needs to know is incredibly simple, at least in my mind. That is not what seperates a good manager from a plain IT worker. What most plain IT workers do not want and can't handle is the stress of ownership. An IT manager has to own the system, project, or team and be accountable for failures that go along with it. I would know, I am in such a position right now. It is tough burden to carry. Bad managers will either sweep problems under the rug hoping to save their image, blame and punish subordinates for their own failings and bad decisions, or they simply are entrenched and never get held accountable for demonstrably bad judgement.
If he does only what you describe in your rant, the company will fail and whether you believe it or not, the majority of companies tend to avoid ridiculously stupid promotion and hiring decisions.
Typical Randian Fallacy. Ridiculously stupid promotions and hiring decisions are only avoided if the manager above the bad manager is also NOT a bad manager. You would know how rampant this problem actually is if you actually worked in corporate culture for an extended period of time.
People make bad irrational decisions that go against their self interest all the time. The Randian Fallacy is assuming that the majority of people make rational decisions that are in their self interest. They don't. Furthermore bad management and irrational decisions do not necessarily doom a company to failure. Sometimes signing a lucrative contract in a niche market with negligible competition allows companies to make idiotic and catastrophically poor decisions and still come out ahead despite being mismanaged. Sure they could be EVEN MORE successful if they were ran correctly, however the bottom line is they still turn a profit and shareholders are happy. Again this is yet another rampant problem in the industry that you should already know about. Seeing as how you demonstrably have never experienced this, you must be extraordinarily lucky working for nothing but great companies.
I completely agree that IT people need to do a MUCH better job of communicating to non-technical people, but you have to understand how overworked and stretched thin these guys can be. On top of 50-60 hr work weeks, most are on call 24/7 and get woken up in the middle of the night from time to time. Even if your pager doesn't go off, you still have the stress of worrying if you are going to be spending Christmas Eve with your wife on the couch by the fire, or if you are going to be interupted by a page. Further still if you are out of the house you will constantly worry about how quickly you can access a computer from any given point if you are paged. So please, take your complaints to management if IT doesn't have the time to give you more than a 1 sentence answer. They were the ones who slashed budgets so they could get their big bonus checks after all.
So much of their life is hidden under a bushel because they don't discuss things, they don't divulge what they know
Is it that they are not divulging what they know and witholding secrets? ... Or is it that they just don't really know anything? Think about it.
In IT, the knowledgable ones never get promoted because funding is slashed to the point where the handful of guys remaining are doing x3 the work they used to, and now they are knowledgable and indispensable in their current roles. In todays world, knowing nothing but how to BS, deceive others, getting an MBA online and being a sociopathic asshole is the only fast track to IT management.
Science helps to uncover the deep truths of reality, and we all know that our Neo-Conservative overlords will never support that which brings truth to light... Reality after all has a clear liberal bias.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlons_razor
You're like the hardline conservative male politicians in America who rally against homosexuality in public, but then enjoy blowjobs from anonymous men in airport washrooms.
Yes because rallying against racism is what comes to mind when thinking about hardline conservative male politicians... I stand by what I said, because I have seen real racism against an entire people because of corporate decisions from assclowns that have wet dreams about outsourcing as much software development as possible to third world countries. My neighbor runs a small website that he farms all the development work out to Vietnam. You should hear how he talks about these poor saps like he is doing them this huge favor for paying them essentially $4/hr. "Oh yessa massa! I sho is grateful!" It is slavery out and out.
Where the fuck do you live that you run into juniors expecting 100k? The juniors I see would be happy with 45k a year and not being dumped on by superiors and bean counters that contribute NOTHING! Do you know how disillusioning it is to join a team as a developer with less than 3 years of experience, and to work for a bunch of guys who literally dick around on the internet all day and make 3 times their salary? Then they get talked down to, asked to work overtime, get ignored, and not appreciated. It is no wonder they leave.
Do you realize how racist that sounds? Everybody you claim to be a good programmer is essentially from a predominantly Caucasian country. Third world countries have poor schools, desperate people who lie on resumes to get jobs they are not qualified for, and scummy managers who exploit big money contracts and give cheap subpar talent. It has absolutely nothing to do with people in Third World countries being poor programmers in general. They are just being exploited.
When one thinks of NYC, the same stirrings of exciting bleeding edge technological progress does not come to mind as say, Palo Alto. People think about scummy hedge funds and ridiculous cost of living. Try making it in NYC or Boston with less than 50k a year. It's not fun.