I have never written a game, yet I have written several other pieces of software. Just because I enjoy coding doesn't mean I enjoy making games.
Well here my curriculum vitae when it comes to programming. It will sound familiar for many people at my age (late 30s).
I started off when I was about 10, 11 years old with Basic. That's nearly 30 years ago now. I did quite interesting things there, once I rigged up a shaking coil to my MSX home computer via the joystick port, allowing people to time their game, and enter their name for high score. That's the nearest I came to writing a game, and that was for one night only. It was a success, no-one had ever seen something like it before.
Later through secondary school I didn't program, then in college had to learn Turbo Pascal as a side subject, which was dead easy to me and some other people with coding experience, and totally incomprehensible for the other half of the class. We did some quite interesting things with it, such as controlling a small car.
And then some eight years ago Python. A very easy to learn language, concise, I love it. With the help of GTK and Glade is making a GUI a breeze, it's actually fun to do. As soon as you understand the basics, signals and so, it's all so easy. It's now my absolute favourite language. And this one I'd recommend anyone who would want to learn coding, and wants to be able to write simple to semi-complex projects. It's a scripting language, so not as fast as compiled languages, but on modern hardware for most applications fast enough.
Shortly after I used Python also to power my web sites, and in the process picked up MySQL. Now SQL that's a totally different animal when it comes to programming. I can write simple queries, but nothing fancy at all. I just don't understand the way it works well enough - this mainly due to lack of experience and training. I just never bothered to learn it, as it's not necessary.
Half a year ago I started playing with Android, and thus had to learn Java. It's become "yet another language" syntax-wise. The basics of programming are the same across languages after all. It's fun, but I'd love to be able to use Python there. Java may be a technically better choice (I trust Google on that they don't make such a choice over one night of ice), it's missing the ease of programming Python offers. But I manage quite well, I have to say.
Well to come back on the "write a game" advice: that's not my advice. I'd write something that I need - an itch to scratch. I learned programming first out of curiosity, later expanded on that when I felt the need. I needed a fax manager - I wrote one, and learned Python to do it. I needed a web site - I wrote one, and leaned html and MySQL for it. I wanted to write an Android app, and learned Java and Android platform for it. I've no intention to learn a new language just for learning that language, but if the need is there I will.
On the other hand, one of the primary jobs of a manager is to be detached from some of the nitty-gritty details and to be keeping an eye on the big picture.
One of the other main jobs of a manager is to keep their subordinates (in this case: their coder) detached not as much from the "big picture" but everything that goes in it: legal issues, marketing, planning deadlines, decisions on graphical design, UI layouts, features to include (and to exclude), etc.
A coder may give their ideas for features and so, but in the end it should be the manager that tells the coder "this is how it's going to look like, these features have to be included, now make it work like that". To the coder to implement just that. And to the manager again to oversee that the coder is actually implementing what they want them to implement.
For a manger I think it's very useful to at least be able to do the basics of what the people they manage do. I mean: if you manage coders, it'd be very helpful to be able to code yourself. Most likely not that well, that doesn't matter, as you're not the one coding. But understanding what a coder is doing, the tools they use, how they use it, why they use it, where the typical problems lie: that should be helpful. When talking to your coders about their work it helps understanding why they're doing things the way they do, and to have more realistic expectations of what can be done and what not.
But don't expect to be as good a coder as they are - you're manager because of your management skills, managing coders because you know about coding. Coders are coders because they know how to code stuff, and how to code it well.
The linked article mentions 11,000 miles at it's closest. This may be after the update (they mention the article has been updated, not the exact changes).
The BBC report about LulzSec quitting mentioned that the group also indicated they had some 5 GB of information on hand from the hacked sites, that would be released over the upcoming three weeks.
So much for quitting. It seems that only accounts for the hacking attacks.
And the organisations affected should be glad about that - and hopefully it inspires many more to fix their systems before LulzSec or equivalent break in, or worse, someone with seriously malicious intentions does the same.
The announcement talks includes "our crew of six" - that statement indicates it's a small group, a closed group, and I'd guess it's a group of friends.
And on top of that, from the relative sophistication of the attacks (especially when compared to those claimed by Anonymous) this are people that know what they are doing - indeed some of those attacks may have been prepared long time ago (as in: vulnerabilities identified, waiting for exploitation). Possibly working in the network security industry even.
Oh well LulzSec out, Anonymous is quite silent recently - what's next? I haven't heard any names yet but it's surely just a matter of time before the next group appears, inspired by their predecessors.
Well, since two out of three would be happy to see Free Software, open systems, and open source in general die, it looks bad. And Android is a weak form of open source that isn't really all that helpful except to Google.
True. And I also find it sad to see a promising platform like MeeGo die. Not just because it's open source, also because we're not exactly spoilt for choice in the smartphone/tablet world. Sure there are dozens of handsets, a great choice of hardware, but just two serious software platforms running on it.
And when looking at choice, there is only one platform with a lot of choice, and that's a contradiction in terms really.
We have Apple with their iPhone (with just a few slightly different versions on the market) and iOS.
We have BlackBerry with their line of phones, and their own OS. They're not doing so well recently.
Microsoft with it's WP7 platform. It's available on a handful of phones, and Nokia is trying to make it work on their phones (they haven't released a single product yet).
Nokia with remnants of their Symbian and MeeGo offerings - as long as stocks last.
And then there is the plethora of offerings running Android. The hardware is different, the OS is the same (save some minor branding in the UI).
So much for choice... you only have a reasonable choice if you choose Android. One choice if you like iOS (a good choice if you like iOS for sure - but also an expensive one).
Now, honest question: why in the world would someone want to dual-boot their PHONE?
For a PC I can somewhat imagine it: key applications available only on the other platform (dual booting into Windows to play games, for example, if it can't be solved by running Windows in VirtualBox like I have to do for e-banking).
Android is running on iPhones too (and I wouldn't be surprised if someone got it working on an iPad). There are plenty of rooted iPhones. But are there really people buying an iPhone to run Android on it? Or is anyone dual-booting their iPhone?
Sorry but except for a very small group of hard-core enthusiasts I don't see this idea take off, at all.
Being a mere tool, doesn't that imply he's a fool? Except that he'll get a nice salary for being a fool. And a tool. So maybe he's not that big of a fool after all.
And then? Open source is great and so - but software is nothing without hardware it can be installed on.
Mobile phones are devices, not exactly what I see as a platform to install a different OS on.
Also while it may have a nice framework for app development, with a user base of 2 there will not be many app developers interested in working on the platform. Some hobbyists maybe, but nothing to take serious.
Really without at least one major phone maker behind it, MeeGo is going to die. Open source or not, it's going to die. Sad but true. Android is the future, iOS a good second (will be second due to it's restriction to Apple devices), WP7 may survive thanks to the deep pockets of Microsoft, but for the rest... well... what rest?
Yes it's a lot of people visiting Google. Some may be double counted of course, many more will be missed due to shared Internet connections. If at home my wife and I use the Internet at the same time, we share a single connection, and with that IP address. I wonder whether they count that as one or as two unique visits.
On the other hand, one billion unique visitors to Google isn't that surprising, considering there are currently almost than 2.1 billion Internet users according to this site. How accurate this number is, that's hard for me to judge, though it does sound plausible.
Finding stuff on the Internet means you need help from a search engine. To me there are two core uses of the Internet: one is communication (e-mail, IM, forums), the other is finding information. And for the second one (which includes finding music, videos, etc) one needs help from a search engine. And Google is by far the most popular search engine around, overall. Some countries have local search engines that are more popular, worldwide Google has a market share of something like 80-90% - the sites that give search engine market shares do not exactly agree, except for Google having a near-monopoly on search nowadays.
So to put it all in perspective: it seems that about half the Internet users in this world uses Google at least once every month. A far from shocking number, you may even call it on the low side considering how important search engines are for being able to find information on this vast network.
True. But then I have the feeling that the safe vertical landing speed of an unmanned tank is a bit higher than that of an aircraft with passengers. I know they drop tanks out of aircraft, but I don't expect there to be crew on board during the drop.
Parachutes need a certain minimum height to work. If you're too low to the ground no time for a parachute to deploy and slow you down before you run out of height. And for a reasonably sized, manned craft you need one hell of a large parachute.
Considering the size of a parachute an average skydiver uses, a complete aircraft including a number of passengers would need a pretty big parachute to be able to come down at a safe speed. Doesn't have to be exactly a comfortable landing of course, just a safe one.
Yet, somehow, all this automation really has raised the general standard of living. It vastly improved productivity - freeing up labourers that were once doing assembly jobs to do something else. Or with the same number of labourers you can produce a much larger number of products, at lower price.
Sure it may hurt some people in the short term, in the long term this benefits all.
Mind that part of the reason the US has become pretty affluent over the last 100 years is the export of manual jobs to other countries, and the increased international trade (those tariffs and other protectionist trade barriers have the same issues as delaying automation). It hurt some in the short run, that sucks surely, yet overall the people definitely are better off.
When it comes to "take something, iron out the mistakes, and market it" makes me think more of Apple than of Microsoft. However Apple's hunger for control doesn't go together with the basic bitcoin principles.
The same accounts for Microsoft's security models of course. Doesn't go together with bitcoin.
No, more likely a company like PayPal would do it, they are an established payment broker already. Or a new, well-funded start-up run by some clever uni grads specialised in crypto.
My figures are more often from the textile industry, where it's a larger share.
Anyway for your woofer system: would you pay RMB 11 more to manufacturer? Or would you just walk to another manufacturer that can still do it at RMB 215 a piece? I expect the second.
Manufacturers in China do not have brand names to back them up. You're typically buying some no-name brand, not some established brand like Samsung, for example. The Samsung costs more - but gives you some guarantees on quality, warranty, etc. But then of course Samsung probably outsources manufacturing again, to the cheapest manufacturer that can supply the correct quality, and Samsung is also not willing to pay that RMB 11 extra to cover the double wage costs. They will also ask other manufacturers who can do it cheaper.
So even at your wage cost ratio it's an important issue. It eats into the already thin margins, I've heard typical margins of 2-3% or even less.
By the way it's interesting that you quote that fob price in RMB, not USD. I'm used to seeing USD prices only, if only because most overseas buyers can not pay in RMB.
Figures I see are mainly from the textile industry and other industries, where labour is a larger share.
What I hear for manufacturers is that they typically have to work on margins like 2-3% for fob price. Doubling labour cost would be more than their profit margin.
Part of the problem is that for most manufacturers, they're totally replaceable. They have no brand name to back-up their product, and their price. I mean you're buying say a Samsung DVD player or a no-name DVD player. The first is made by Samsung, and comes with certain quality guarantees. It costs a lot more than the no-name DVD player that can be made by basically any manufacturer, and typically comes from the one that makes them cheapest. Retail chains like wal-mart shop around manufacturers, making it really hard for the manufacturers to charge rising cost to their customers.
Good chance it's the same for your woofer system. Would you or your client pay RMB 11 a piece more? Or would you walk to another manufacturer that's making the same product for less money?
On the other hand, Samsung of course also has their products made in China. Samsung will supply the parts (or at least the essential ones), the factory assembles the product. Which factory? Well probably they're working with a lot of them and those that supply sufficient quality at the lowest price get most orders. The factory is squeezed, again.
By the way interesting you quote the fob price in RMB. I'm used to seeing fob prices quoted in USD. If only because most overseas customers can not pay in RMB, as it's not a freely convertible currency.
Over the last 8 years or so I've seen wages rise a lot in China: from 20 RMB per day to 40 RMB per day, and rising fast. And by the way it's usually a larger chunk of cost than the 2-5% you mention, as typically products that take a lot of labour are done in China.
I'd say China will draw jobs from the US for another 4-6 years. Then the bigger threat is automation and robotics.
A lot of robotics is coming out of the developed world. It's high-tech stuff. Japan is doing well for the fancy stuff, not sure about industrial robotics though. But it'd surprise me if the US can't hold their ground in that kind of fields anymore. So what threat? Such a development could as well mean a boon for the US economy.
Slashdot Mirror
I have never written a game, yet I have written several other pieces of software. Just because I enjoy coding doesn't mean I enjoy making games.
Well here my curriculum vitae when it comes to programming. It will sound familiar for many people at my age (late 30s).
I started off when I was about 10, 11 years old with Basic. That's nearly 30 years ago now. I did quite interesting things there, once I rigged up a shaking coil to my MSX home computer via the joystick port, allowing people to time their game, and enter their name for high score. That's the nearest I came to writing a game, and that was for one night only. It was a success, no-one had ever seen something like it before.
Later through secondary school I didn't program, then in college had to learn Turbo Pascal as a side subject, which was dead easy to me and some other people with coding experience, and totally incomprehensible for the other half of the class. We did some quite interesting things with it, such as controlling a small car.
And then some eight years ago Python. A very easy to learn language, concise, I love it. With the help of GTK and Glade is making a GUI a breeze, it's actually fun to do. As soon as you understand the basics, signals and so, it's all so easy. It's now my absolute favourite language. And this one I'd recommend anyone who would want to learn coding, and wants to be able to write simple to semi-complex projects. It's a scripting language, so not as fast as compiled languages, but on modern hardware for most applications fast enough.
Shortly after I used Python also to power my web sites, and in the process picked up MySQL. Now SQL that's a totally different animal when it comes to programming. I can write simple queries, but nothing fancy at all. I just don't understand the way it works well enough - this mainly due to lack of experience and training. I just never bothered to learn it, as it's not necessary.
Half a year ago I started playing with Android, and thus had to learn Java. It's become "yet another language" syntax-wise. The basics of programming are the same across languages after all. It's fun, but I'd love to be able to use Python there. Java may be a technically better choice (I trust Google on that they don't make such a choice over one night of ice), it's missing the ease of programming Python offers. But I manage quite well, I have to say.
Well to come back on the "write a game" advice: that's not my advice. I'd write something that I need - an itch to scratch. I learned programming first out of curiosity, later expanded on that when I felt the need. I needed a fax manager - I wrote one, and learned Python to do it. I needed a web site - I wrote one, and leaned html and MySQL for it. I wanted to write an Android app, and learned Java and Android platform for it. I've no intention to learn a new language just for learning that language, but if the need is there I will.
On the other hand, one of the primary jobs of a manager is to be detached from some of the nitty-gritty details and to be keeping an eye on the big picture.
One of the other main jobs of a manager is to keep their subordinates (in this case: their coder) detached not as much from the "big picture" but everything that goes in it: legal issues, marketing, planning deadlines, decisions on graphical design, UI layouts, features to include (and to exclude), etc.
A coder may give their ideas for features and so, but in the end it should be the manager that tells the coder "this is how it's going to look like, these features have to be included, now make it work like that". To the coder to implement just that. And to the manager again to oversee that the coder is actually implementing what they want them to implement.
For a manger I think it's very useful to at least be able to do the basics of what the people they manage do. I mean: if you manage coders, it'd be very helpful to be able to code yourself. Most likely not that well, that doesn't matter, as you're not the one coding. But understanding what a coder is doing, the tools they use, how they use it, why they use it, where the typical problems lie: that should be helpful. When talking to your coders about their work it helps understanding why they're doing things the way they do, and to have more realistic expectations of what can be done and what not.
But don't expect to be as good a coder as they are - you're manager because of your management skills, managing coders because you know about coding. Coders are coders because they know how to code stuff, and how to code it well.
TFA says that if this object were to hit Earth, it would likely explode harmlessly in the upper atmosphere.
The linked article mentions 11,000 miles at it's closest. This may be after the update (they mention the article has been updated, not the exact changes).
The BBC report about LulzSec quitting mentioned that the group also indicated they had some 5 GB of information on hand from the hacked sites, that would be released over the upcoming three weeks.
So much for quitting. It seems that only accounts for the hacking attacks.
And the organisations affected should be glad about that - and hopefully it inspires many more to fix their systems before LulzSec or equivalent break in, or worse, someone with seriously malicious intentions does the same.
You're probably right. Or at least close to.
The announcement talks includes "our crew of six" - that statement indicates it's a small group, a closed group, and I'd guess it's a group of friends.
And on top of that, from the relative sophistication of the attacks (especially when compared to those claimed by Anonymous) this are people that know what they are doing - indeed some of those attacks may have been prepared long time ago (as in: vulnerabilities identified, waiting for exploitation). Possibly working in the network security industry even.
Oh well LulzSec out, Anonymous is quite silent recently - what's next? I haven't heard any names yet but it's surely just a matter of time before the next group appears, inspired by their predecessors.
Maybe Lulzsec is under new management.
They have management??
Well, since two out of three would be happy to see Free Software, open systems, and open source in general die, it looks bad. And Android is a weak form of open source that isn't really all that helpful except to Google.
True. And I also find it sad to see a promising platform like MeeGo die. Not just because it's open source, also because we're not exactly spoilt for choice in the smartphone/tablet world. Sure there are dozens of handsets, a great choice of hardware, but just two serious software platforms running on it.
And when looking at choice, there is only one platform with a lot of choice, and that's a contradiction in terms really.
We have Apple with their iPhone (with just a few slightly different versions on the market) and iOS.
We have BlackBerry with their line of phones, and their own OS. They're not doing so well recently.
Microsoft with it's WP7 platform. It's available on a handful of phones, and Nokia is trying to make it work on their phones (they haven't released a single product yet).
Nokia with remnants of their Symbian and MeeGo offerings - as long as stocks last.
And then there is the plethora of offerings running Android. The hardware is different, the OS is the same (save some minor branding in the UI).
So much for choice... you only have a reasonable choice if you choose Android. One choice if you like iOS (a good choice if you like iOS for sure - but also an expensive one).
It's a reason, though it definitely falls within the "group of hard-core enthusiasts" category...
Now, honest question: why in the world would someone want to dual-boot their PHONE?
For a PC I can somewhat imagine it: key applications available only on the other platform (dual booting into Windows to play games, for example, if it can't be solved by running Windows in VirtualBox like I have to do for e-banking).
Android is running on iPhones too (and I wouldn't be surprised if someone got it working on an iPad). There are plenty of rooted iPhones. But are there really people buying an iPhone to run Android on it? Or is anyone dual-booting their iPhone?
Sorry but except for a very small group of hard-core enthusiasts I don't see this idea take off, at all.
Being a mere tool, doesn't that imply he's a fool? Except that he'll get a nice salary for being a fool. And a tool. So maybe he's not that big of a fool after all.
And then? Open source is great and so - but software is nothing without hardware it can be installed on.
Mobile phones are devices, not exactly what I see as a platform to install a different OS on.
Also while it may have a nice framework for app development, with a user base of 2 there will not be many app developers interested in working on the platform. Some hobbyists maybe, but nothing to take serious.
Really without at least one major phone maker behind it, MeeGo is going to die. Open source or not, it's going to die. Sad but true. Android is the future, iOS a good second (will be second due to it's restriction to Apple devices), WP7 may survive thanks to the deep pockets of Microsoft, but for the rest... well... what rest?
Yes it's a lot of people visiting Google. Some may be double counted of course, many more will be missed due to shared Internet connections. If at home my wife and I use the Internet at the same time, we share a single connection, and with that IP address. I wonder whether they count that as one or as two unique visits.
On the other hand, one billion unique visitors to Google isn't that surprising, considering there are currently almost than 2.1 billion Internet users according to this site. How accurate this number is, that's hard for me to judge, though it does sound plausible.
Finding stuff on the Internet means you need help from a search engine. To me there are two core uses of the Internet: one is communication (e-mail, IM, forums), the other is finding information. And for the second one (which includes finding music, videos, etc) one needs help from a search engine. And Google is by far the most popular search engine around, overall. Some countries have local search engines that are more popular, worldwide Google has a market share of something like 80-90% - the sites that give search engine market shares do not exactly agree, except for Google having a near-monopoly on search nowadays.
So to put it all in perspective: it seems that about half the Internet users in this world uses Google at least once every month. A far from shocking number, you may even call it on the low side considering how important search engines are for being able to find information on this vast network.
Only if you can find them... maybe you can hire them :)
True. But then I have the feeling that the safe vertical landing speed of an unmanned tank is a bit higher than that of an aircraft with passengers. I know they drop tanks out of aircraft, but I don't expect there to be crew on board during the drop.
Parachutes need a certain minimum height to work. If you're too low to the ground no time for a parachute to deploy and slow you down before you run out of height. And for a reasonably sized, manned craft you need one hell of a large parachute.
Considering the size of a parachute an average skydiver uses, a complete aircraft including a number of passengers would need a pretty big parachute to be able to come down at a safe speed. Doesn't have to be exactly a comfortable landing of course, just a safe one.
Yet, somehow, all this automation really has raised the general standard of living. It vastly improved productivity - freeing up labourers that were once doing assembly jobs to do something else. Or with the same number of labourers you can produce a much larger number of products, at lower price.
Sure it may hurt some people in the short term, in the long term this benefits all.
Mind that part of the reason the US has become pretty affluent over the last 100 years is the export of manual jobs to other countries, and the increased international trade (those tariffs and other protectionist trade barriers have the same issues as delaying automation). It hurt some in the short run, that sucks surely, yet overall the people definitely are better off.
When it comes to "take something, iron out the mistakes, and market it" makes me think more of Apple than of Microsoft. However Apple's hunger for control doesn't go together with the basic bitcoin principles.
The same accounts for Microsoft's security models of course. Doesn't go together with bitcoin.
No, more likely a company like PayPal would do it, they are an established payment broker already. Or a new, well-funded start-up run by some clever uni grads specialised in crypto.
My figures are more often from the textile industry, where it's a larger share.
Anyway for your woofer system: would you pay RMB 11 more to manufacturer? Or would you just walk to another manufacturer that can still do it at RMB 215 a piece? I expect the second.
Manufacturers in China do not have brand names to back them up. You're typically buying some no-name brand, not some established brand like Samsung, for example. The Samsung costs more - but gives you some guarantees on quality, warranty, etc. But then of course Samsung probably outsources manufacturing again, to the cheapest manufacturer that can supply the correct quality, and Samsung is also not willing to pay that RMB 11 extra to cover the double wage costs. They will also ask other manufacturers who can do it cheaper.
So even at your wage cost ratio it's an important issue. It eats into the already thin margins, I've heard typical margins of 2-3% or even less.
By the way it's interesting that you quote that fob price in RMB, not USD. I'm used to seeing USD prices only, if only because most overseas buyers can not pay in RMB.
Figures I see are mainly from the textile industry and other industries, where labour is a larger share.
What I hear for manufacturers is that they typically have to work on margins like 2-3% for fob price. Doubling labour cost would be more than their profit margin.
Part of the problem is that for most manufacturers, they're totally replaceable. They have no brand name to back-up their product, and their price. I mean you're buying say a Samsung DVD player or a no-name DVD player. The first is made by Samsung, and comes with certain quality guarantees. It costs a lot more than the no-name DVD player that can be made by basically any manufacturer, and typically comes from the one that makes them cheapest. Retail chains like wal-mart shop around manufacturers, making it really hard for the manufacturers to charge rising cost to their customers.
Good chance it's the same for your woofer system. Would you or your client pay RMB 11 a piece more? Or would you walk to another manufacturer that's making the same product for less money?
On the other hand, Samsung of course also has their products made in China. Samsung will supply the parts (or at least the essential ones), the factory assembles the product. Which factory? Well probably they're working with a lot of them and those that supply sufficient quality at the lowest price get most orders. The factory is squeezed, again.
By the way interesting you quote the fob price in RMB. I'm used to seeing fob prices quoted in USD. If only because most overseas customers can not pay in RMB, as it's not a freely convertible currency.
Over the last 8 years or so I've seen wages rise a lot in China: from 20 RMB per day to 40 RMB per day, and rising fast. And by the way it's usually a larger chunk of cost than the 2-5% you mention, as typically products that take a lot of labour are done in China.
I'd say China will draw jobs from the US for another 4-6 years. Then the bigger threat is automation and robotics.
A lot of robotics is coming out of the developed world. It's high-tech stuff. Japan is doing well for the fancy stuff, not sure about industrial robotics though. But it'd surprise me if the US can't hold their ground in that kind of fields anymore. So what threat? Such a development could as well mean a boon for the US economy.