Especially in the case of Eve, where it's known that an insider provided huge benefits to one particular group of longtime players. Last I checked, they were still at the top of the food chain with wrists that stung just a little.
They might consider bringing up just a small number of shards to see what happens. Right now strategies, techniques and culture may be so entrenched that it stifles innovation, whereas having 3 or 4 shards would allow new techniques to develop.
I stand by what I said. In this instance, I'm saying that they need an entirely new branch of methods and study to verify that a human's on the other end. They've gone so far down that path that it's harder for a human to read it than a computer.
They probably should be, honestly. However, why not be thankful that the opposition is being open about their abilities to crack security? Obviously, a CAPTCHA system isn't going to work for the future; we should be developing a new methodology for verification.
Your reply is somewhat akin to someone saying that we should keep free speech since it's a net positive, and you replying that free speech doesn't exist because you don't allow your children to swear. He's arguing that we need to avoid systemic overnets and undernets. Roping off your own network with different rules doesn't have anything to do with TFA.
TFA wants to avoid having these things built into the entire internet from end to end, which is what some people say we need. Patchwork restrictions and rules are to be expected and encouraged where appropriate, but having it built in from end to end is what we're talking about.
What are you talking about? How would you say "Nee" if you're banned from my forum? How would you bother me by saying "Nee" if you can't come into my property? I have no idea what you're talking about, and I suspect that you don't either.
Statistics require multiple data points. Statistics based on one data point are called "anecdotes" or, more simply, "bullshit". We have investigated one planet very well, one planet very little, and a handful of others we've looked at from a very long distance. We can't rule out the existence of life in our own solar system, and there are billions of those in just our galaxy. Statistically speaking, there's no way in hell that we can even begin to do the math required to figure out if the anthropic principle is skewing our understanding of the universe. It's like saying that the cosmological constants are finely tuned to life, and that if they changed a little bit life would be impossible. BULLSHIT. We know for a fact that life on earth has found a way to live almost anywhere on the planet, be it the arctic or just outside volcanic vents. For all we know, life has found a way to evolve in any circumstance, be it the matter orbiting black holes or in universes where light travels at 1 meter/hr and gravity is many times weaker than it is here. The anthropic principle is a way to look at the vastness of the knowledge that we don't have about the universe and make sense of it by saying, "Well, I think we're special, don't you guys?" "Oh yeah, my mom calls me special all the time." "What do you say we turn that into a theory and call it a night?"
The only thing the anthropic principle tells us is that we can't use ourselves as a valid data point. It doesn't tell us anything more or less than that.
Obviously the QDP virus, and the OVB bacterium will have mutated by that point as well. Of course, after our bout with AFLP in 2048, we'll be much better equipped to deal with them, even with the smaller population. Overall, 2078 will be seen as a time when we've mostly re-conquered disease.
No you don't. You don't have the right to free speech within my house, and I can tell you to leave my home and use force to compel you to if something you say offends me. Hell, I can make you leave my home if you refuse to say something I want you to say.
You do not have the right to free speech on my servers. If I'm running a forum and I don't like what you say, I'm well within my rights to delete your posts and ban you forever. Because I own these things, I have control over them, in many ways more control than the government will ever have. The government can only restrict certain types of speech, I can restrict any or all speech.
Re:The Printer Friendly version ...
on
C# In-Depth
·
· Score: 0
While you are a true hero for posting a link to the printer friendly version, it didn't actually send me there. Perhaps this link will do it, although if they're smart they'll make you go to the article before displaying the print version.
Well, to be completely accurate, you can't rule out the possibility of the Russian KGB supporting the virus author, you just don't have evidence for it;)
WHOOSH. My point was that a programmer you can get for 60k isn't going to be as good as a programmer you'd get for 90k, and that the very best programmers in the business are worth at least 4 programmers that you'd get a 60k. Cell phone customers are all pretty much created equal, and cell phone companies are pretty close to the same, with no company being many times better than another in measurable ways. Programmers are not like that, so the analogy is fundamentally flawed.
And if they come up with a novel solution, then they should get a patent. However, if they identify something like the fact that there are patents on adjustable brake pedal height, and patents on using electronic sensors for brakes, but not a patent on using them together, well, that's obvious as soon as someone sees what the space is. Identifying a problem is part of finding a novel invention, and this program can show that the problem is an obvious one.
Actually, I was making fun of the fact that you had no argument either. It was my way of saying that you had no substance to that particular point, therefore any response to the contrary need not have any substance. I chose "so's your face" because the fact that I've never seen your face would add a little extra stupidity to the comment. For all I know, you had your face switched with John Travolta's and are, therefore, quite a good looking man.
I say let them do it. If they can find a way to find the holes where no patents exist, then they've found a way to make 90% of patents instantly obvious. If an analytical tool can figure out that something can be patented, then there was no need for creativity or ingenuity, right?
It's a fully functional language which uses a syntax almost identical to C
And then you have a gripe about using "this"? Javascript and C are extremely dissimilar, and if you can't figure that out then don't program in it. Might as well be complaining that python, C++, and Java all have syntax almost identical to C yet act differently under difference circumstances.
It tries to be easy to program by assuming end-of-statement operators (';') at certain places if the function wouldn't otherwise parse. This makes it incredibly difficult to debug. I truly consider this a bug in the design.
I think it's dumb too, but then again I think that the way C-like languages ignore whitespace is also kind of dumb. Modern written languages use white space to denote many things and it's carefully controlled and used. Programming languages ignore almost all white space; how does that make sense? I'm not saying that Javascript is right in this instance, but making white space meaningful shouldn't automatically mean it's bad.
null.typeof returns 'object'. So does Array.typeof. That's just... dumb.
So's your face.
It feels like it's trying to be several different languages all at once
That's your problem. Stop thinking about Javascript as other languages and think about it as a language all its own. If I tried to program in C as if it were Java, I'd have a hell of a time doing it too. Javascript follows a different paradigm, and if you come at it with preconceptions like you evidently have, you're going to have problems.
First of all, the mod who gave you "redundant" apparently doesn't realize that this has been widely known for a long time.
Second, this is new because someone's done the actual study and shown the degree to which studies don't go reported. Even if only half of the unreported studies were because of poor results, that's enough to skew things very, very badly.
Anyone doing this should get put in jail for a long, long time. It may not be fraud in the sense that they're publishing fraudulent results, but by not publishing results they're creating fraudulent overall data, with possibly deadly results. This needs to stop.
Exactly. Why spend dozens of hours getting to the same place where you can get with a little deception? You can even argue that it's better for the company in the long run.
I'm not against competition by any means. But if i started building cars that run on an internal combustion engine, I would hardly call it a great step forward for mankind.
Because they're an authoritarian government that lies all the time?
This is a great step forward, not only for china, but for all of humankind.
This is almost old hat for Russian and American astronauts (or cosmonauts or whatever). Any country could work with those two space programs and complete a space walk on their own. I wouldn't be surprised if the ESA has already done this as well and I just haven't heard of it. In other words, the third or fourth country doing this isn't a great step forward for all humankind, it's one more country catching up to where other countries were decades ago.
In addition, China's extra space capacity isn't a good thing. Space so far has been nothing but a wagging match between Russia and the US, it's been relatively free of military conflict. If we want space to become something other than a place to conduct science and take some pictures, then increasing China's space capabilities is a great way to start.
If you can't get money back on those tracks, there are a lot of ways to abuse their returns policy. My friend bought some games from Gamestop when they were running a really good, 2 for $40 sale on nearly new games and returned one of them to Wal Mart for a $40 gift card. Even if you don't like the store, you can at least get your cold cereal with a gift card.
As you pointed out, for IT workers to really effect a company that refuses to pay overtime, every worker needs to leave.
actually I didn't say that every worker leaving was required, just that it would have the desired effect. In reality, managing turnover at a company is almost always the biggest concern they have. Losing one developer who'd been there for less than 2 years was a big enough deal to get the management to change its mind on worker treatment at my current company, and the treatment wasn't as bad as what happens at most companies. Everyone leaving is a worst-case-scenario sort of deal, but it can and does happen when individuals leave too.
Because comparing humans to cell phones is a massive non-sequitur? Also, because the difference between a good programmer and a great programmer is huge, and the difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer is just as big. I'm not saying that all companies will treat their employees great, but the good ones will. Why would you employ only the programmers who put up with your shit when you know that the best programmers are at least 10x as productive and get treated like pure gold at other companies?
Actually, I don't run anything, I'm a low level programmer. I'm starting to suspect those that say there's not a shortage are either not looking hard enough or so bad that nobody will touch them. I rarely go through more than 3 interviews with companies before I get an offer, and I can get 3 interviews in less than a week's time. I could just be lucky, but I don't think so. I think what's happened is that we're in a field where the difference between a bad programmer, a good programmer and a great programmer is so large that when the bad programmers can't find a job, it looks like a surplus.
Outsourcing to India and China is an awfully hard process that not a lot of people can get right. At best, it's a minefield of communication errors and code that I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially in the case of Eve, where it's known that an insider provided huge benefits to one particular group of longtime players. Last I checked, they were still at the top of the food chain with wrists that stung just a little.
They might consider bringing up just a small number of shards to see what happens. Right now strategies, techniques and culture may be so entrenched that it stifles innovation, whereas having 3 or 4 shards would allow new techniques to develop.
I stand by what I said. In this instance, I'm saying that they need an entirely new branch of methods and study to verify that a human's on the other end. They've gone so far down that path that it's harder for a human to read it than a computer.
They probably should be, honestly. However, why not be thankful that the opposition is being open about their abilities to crack security? Obviously, a CAPTCHA system isn't going to work for the future; we should be developing a new methodology for verification.
Not sure which one I'd prefer
Go for Hell, much less exclusive. Heaven's HOA really rides your ass about the rules.
Your reply is somewhat akin to someone saying that we should keep free speech since it's a net positive, and you replying that free speech doesn't exist because you don't allow your children to swear. He's arguing that we need to avoid systemic overnets and undernets. Roping off your own network with different rules doesn't have anything to do with TFA.
TFA wants to avoid having these things built into the entire internet from end to end, which is what some people say we need. Patchwork restrictions and rules are to be expected and encouraged where appropriate, but having it built in from end to end is what we're talking about.
What are you talking about? How would you say "Nee" if you're banned from my forum? How would you bother me by saying "Nee" if you can't come into my property? I have no idea what you're talking about, and I suspect that you don't either.
Statistics require multiple data points. Statistics based on one data point are called "anecdotes" or, more simply, "bullshit". We have investigated one planet very well, one planet very little, and a handful of others we've looked at from a very long distance. We can't rule out the existence of life in our own solar system, and there are billions of those in just our galaxy. Statistically speaking, there's no way in hell that we can even begin to do the math required to figure out if the anthropic principle is skewing our understanding of the universe. It's like saying that the cosmological constants are finely tuned to life, and that if they changed a little bit life would be impossible. BULLSHIT. We know for a fact that life on earth has found a way to live almost anywhere on the planet, be it the arctic or just outside volcanic vents. For all we know, life has found a way to evolve in any circumstance, be it the matter orbiting black holes or in universes where light travels at 1 meter/hr and gravity is many times weaker than it is here. The anthropic principle is a way to look at the vastness of the knowledge that we don't have about the universe and make sense of it by saying, "Well, I think we're special, don't you guys?" "Oh yeah, my mom calls me special all the time." "What do you say we turn that into a theory and call it a night?"
The only thing the anthropic principle tells us is that we can't use ourselves as a valid data point. It doesn't tell us anything more or less than that.
Obviously the QDP virus, and the OVB bacterium will have mutated by that point as well. Of course, after our bout with AFLP in 2048, we'll be much better equipped to deal with them, even with the smaller population. Overall, 2078 will be seen as a time when we've mostly re-conquered disease.
Yes, I *do* have free speech. EVERYWHERE.
No you don't. You don't have the right to free speech within my house, and I can tell you to leave my home and use force to compel you to if something you say offends me. Hell, I can make you leave my home if you refuse to say something I want you to say.
You do not have the right to free speech on my servers. If I'm running a forum and I don't like what you say, I'm well within my rights to delete your posts and ban you forever. Because I own these things, I have control over them, in many ways more control than the government will ever have. The government can only restrict certain types of speech, I can restrict any or all speech.
While you are a true hero for posting a link to the printer friendly version, it didn't actually send me there. Perhaps this link will do it, although if they're smart they'll make you go to the article before displaying the print version.
He believes in the market, ergo he'll make you buy it yourself. Maybe if you pray to the invisible hand it'll give you one, but I doubt it.
Well, to be completely accurate, you can't rule out the possibility of the Russian KGB supporting the virus author, you just don't have evidence for it ;)
WHOOSH. My point was that a programmer you can get for 60k isn't going to be as good as a programmer you'd get for 90k, and that the very best programmers in the business are worth at least 4 programmers that you'd get a 60k. Cell phone customers are all pretty much created equal, and cell phone companies are pretty close to the same, with no company being many times better than another in measurable ways. Programmers are not like that, so the analogy is fundamentally flawed.
And if they come up with a novel solution, then they should get a patent. However, if they identify something like the fact that there are patents on adjustable brake pedal height, and patents on using electronic sensors for brakes, but not a patent on using them together, well, that's obvious as soon as someone sees what the space is. Identifying a problem is part of finding a novel invention, and this program can show that the problem is an obvious one.
Actually, I was making fun of the fact that you had no argument either. It was my way of saying that you had no substance to that particular point, therefore any response to the contrary need not have any substance. I chose "so's your face" because the fact that I've never seen your face would add a little extra stupidity to the comment. For all I know, you had your face switched with John Travolta's and are, therefore, quite a good looking man.
I say let them do it. If they can find a way to find the holes where no patents exist, then they've found a way to make 90% of patents instantly obvious. If an analytical tool can figure out that something can be patented, then there was no need for creativity or ingenuity, right?
It's a fully functional language which uses a syntax almost identical to C
And then you have a gripe about using "this"? Javascript and C are extremely dissimilar, and if you can't figure that out then don't program in it. Might as well be complaining that python, C++, and Java all have syntax almost identical to C yet act differently under difference circumstances.
It tries to be easy to program by assuming end-of-statement operators (';') at certain places if the function wouldn't otherwise parse. This makes it incredibly difficult to debug. I truly consider this a bug in the design.
I think it's dumb too, but then again I think that the way C-like languages ignore whitespace is also kind of dumb. Modern written languages use white space to denote many things and it's carefully controlled and used. Programming languages ignore almost all white space; how does that make sense? I'm not saying that Javascript is right in this instance, but making white space meaningful shouldn't automatically mean it's bad.
null.typeof returns 'object'. So does Array.typeof. That's just ... dumb.
So's your face.
It feels like it's trying to be several different languages all at once
That's your problem. Stop thinking about Javascript as other languages and think about it as a language all its own. If I tried to program in C as if it were Java, I'd have a hell of a time doing it too. Javascript follows a different paradigm, and if you come at it with preconceptions like you evidently have, you're going to have problems.
First of all, the mod who gave you "redundant" apparently doesn't realize that this has been widely known for a long time.
Second, this is new because someone's done the actual study and shown the degree to which studies don't go reported. Even if only half of the unreported studies were because of poor results, that's enough to skew things very, very badly.
Anyone doing this should get put in jail for a long, long time. It may not be fraud in the sense that they're publishing fraudulent results, but by not publishing results they're creating fraudulent overall data, with possibly deadly results. This needs to stop.
Exactly. Why spend dozens of hours getting to the same place where you can get with a little deception? You can even argue that it's better for the company in the long run.
I'm not against competition by any means. But if i started building cars that run on an internal combustion engine, I would hardly call it a great step forward for mankind.
Why are all posts so anti-chinese?
Because they're an authoritarian government that lies all the time?
This is a great step forward, not only for china, but for all of humankind.
This is almost old hat for Russian and American astronauts (or cosmonauts or whatever). Any country could work with those two space programs and complete a space walk on their own. I wouldn't be surprised if the ESA has already done this as well and I just haven't heard of it. In other words, the third or fourth country doing this isn't a great step forward for all humankind, it's one more country catching up to where other countries were decades ago.
In addition, China's extra space capacity isn't a good thing. Space so far has been nothing but a wagging match between Russia and the US, it's been relatively free of military conflict. If we want space to become something other than a place to conduct science and take some pictures, then increasing China's space capabilities is a great way to start.
If you can't get money back on those tracks, there are a lot of ways to abuse their returns policy. My friend bought some games from Gamestop when they were running a really good, 2 for $40 sale on nearly new games and returned one of them to Wal Mart for a $40 gift card. Even if you don't like the store, you can at least get your cold cereal with a gift card.
As you pointed out, for IT workers to really effect a company that refuses to pay overtime, every worker needs to leave.
actually I didn't say that every worker leaving was required, just that it would have the desired effect. In reality, managing turnover at a company is almost always the biggest concern they have. Losing one developer who'd been there for less than 2 years was a big enough deal to get the management to change its mind on worker treatment at my current company, and the treatment wasn't as bad as what happens at most companies. Everyone leaving is a worst-case-scenario sort of deal, but it can and does happen when individuals leave too.
Because comparing humans to cell phones is a massive non-sequitur? Also, because the difference between a good programmer and a great programmer is huge, and the difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer is just as big. I'm not saying that all companies will treat their employees great, but the good ones will. Why would you employ only the programmers who put up with your shit when you know that the best programmers are at least 10x as productive and get treated like pure gold at other companies?
Actually, I don't run anything, I'm a low level programmer. I'm starting to suspect those that say there's not a shortage are either not looking hard enough or so bad that nobody will touch them. I rarely go through more than 3 interviews with companies before I get an offer, and I can get 3 interviews in less than a week's time. I could just be lucky, but I don't think so. I think what's happened is that we're in a field where the difference between a bad programmer, a good programmer and a great programmer is so large that when the bad programmers can't find a job, it looks like a surplus.
Outsourcing to India and China is an awfully hard process that not a lot of people can get right. At best, it's a minefield of communication errors and code that I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.