Amen. Mod galoise up. It's not the idea or the first semi-working prototype that matters. It is the first commercially viable and successful invention that matters - because that is the invention that eventually changes the world.
So I guess it makes perfect sense to have such a scanner in your car to ensure you are who you say you are. On busses, trains, at stores, amusement parks and football games, right? Who you are has no bearing on whether you are carrying a weapon or not. It does not make one iota of difference who you are if you are not carrying any weapons. Furthermore, circumvention of this "security" measure is easy - get a fake ID (which is always possible) or send someone who is below the radar. For this non-security you've created a wonderful snooping tool that the government can and will abuse in time regardless of how many times they say "trust us".
I think at this point you are choosing between the lesser of two harms. I think most people would agree that banning fatty foods or most sports is more harmful than dealing with the consequences. But this appears to be a different discussion than the one started.
The amount of the health tax you are currently paying takes into account that most people wear seatbelts. If most people didn't wear seatbelts, your taxes/healtcare premiums would go up even if you wore a seatbelt. So you are being harmed by someone else not wearing a seatbelt. You can slice it many ways to keep health taxes where they are. You could use the original way I mentioned. You could argue that people not wearing seatbelts still get health benefits but up to a certain limit while seatbelted people have higher limits or none at all. You can go to all these great lengths or you can legislate a simple and cheap law.
helmets and seatbelts you are placing the cost of your healthcare on the public. Hence you are harming someone. You can argue that you could be given the choice of not wearing a helmet or seatbelt with the understanding that you waive any right to care you can't pay for if you are injured in an accident. Insider trading does harm others. You are very literally stealing money from other people.
You must mean that in the sense that the ISP sold you "unlimited" bandwidth and it can't deliver on it's promise, right? Sounds like fraud on the ISP's part. Not customer abuse.
No, there is a fundamental difference in your example. In one (the O.J/ISP case), there is no adverse effect to anyone in the world. In the case of speeding on a freeway you are hurting others.
It's a fundamental principle. If you are not hurting anyone why should it be proscribed? (e.g. smoking pot, gay sex in Texas, watching/selling porn, etc.) BTW someone not turning a profit for lack of artificial laws is not being "hurt".
"with ISP you've specifically agreed you wont do that. Get some integrity!"
And if an O.J company wrote on their boxes that by buying their juice you agree to not sharing it with your friends you stick to that integrity? You bought it, it's yours, you can do what you please with it.
He may be a great program manager but if I were Adobe I would stop him from blogging as quickly as I could. Here are some choice quotes from his responses to user comments. With responses like these I wouldn't believe anything he has to say:
[Are you saying you can't figure out how to remove applications? That's really saying something. --J.] [You're a complete moron, and I don't have time to bother poking holes in your litany of ridiculous assertions. --J.] [Sorry to hear that things aren't going well, Ryan. Have you called tech support? If not, why not? --J.] [What sucks is how gullible, lazy, and reckless people prove to be. --J.]
They should now make the obvious follow-up study and let their subjects watch select porn and measure its transformative effect on the brain. Of course, the results probably wouldn't be as popular or easy to write a press release about - porn makes people happy!
All these people were killed by psychopathically violent people. People are not just miraculously killed by "regimes" or blood thirsty leaders, the murder is always carried out by plenty of willing executioners who relish the violence and power. People are grotesquely violent given the opportunity - video games have nothing to do with it.
It may be termed a "donation" but that doesn't make it less than a mandatory payment. As an example, look at the wealth amassed by the Catholic/Anglican church and tell me nobody is paying for their salvation.
The ultimate snake-oil. People contribute their life savings, sacrifice their lives, their children and often murder others in the name of fantastic fictional characters and their self declared human representatives who promise them favors in this life or the next in return.
The gadgets in this article are amateur jobs compared to the scam that is religion.
I really should stop replying to myself... Another important metric is the impact of the bug on the customer. Is the customer shutdown and out of business until the bug is fixed or is it primarily a cosmetic bug or a bug with many workarounds?
Forgot one more important item. I don't know what your role is from the post but it is the engineer's task to provide a fix as quickly as possible (within the constraints of having a life, etc.) if that is what the manager wants. Though tempting and quite distracting, it is ultimately not the engineer's role to ponder the customer's reason. The engineer should provide his manager an assessment of the time required for the fix (in his role) and its associated risk. It's up to the manager (or higher ups) to decide, given the engineering assessments (of dev, QA, etc), if providing the fix quickly is realistic and acceptably risky or not.
The answer to your question is - "it depends". It depends on too many unknowns that may take you longer than 48 hours to explain on/. The overall size of your code base is a meaningless metric - it could be a beautifully architected masterpiece that is easy to tweak and modify or lots of little pieces with relatively few interactions or it could be a 20 Mloc ball of spaghetti. What is the complexity of the specific code with the bug? What is the source of the bug? Is it easily reproducible? Is the location of the bug known? Is the buggy code relatively insulated from the rest of the codebase or is it central to the entire product (think my_very_specific_function_for_twiddling_diddles() vs. printf()). If you fix the bug wrong how many other parts of the code could be affected? What are the ramifications of screwing up the fix beyond embarrassment?
Unless you know all of these, it is arguable you are not prepared to answer if the customer is being realistic (as opposed to reasonable).
I recall this worked for railroads but it may be applicable to other elements as well. When the city starts clamoring for railroads just build them anywhere in a big clump (even in the corner of the map where they are not accessible or leading to anything). This way everyone is happy you have a railroad and they don't get in the way of anything - SimCity even simulates pork barrel projects!
And yet you firmly believe that these same business customers who are relying on a 16-years-old software really need to upgrade to the latest and greatest Windows OS?! No, the customers with the 16-years-old software will not change anything in their configuration and that includes the OS. Unless of course, MS makes it impossible for them to do.
And yet the Soviet Union couldn't feed its population. A few token achievements in a few narrow fields over a short period of time don't a scientific empire make. The Soviet Union eventually fell apart because it couldn't keep up with the scientific innovation of the free world. While it may have been sexy to shoot stuff into space or to just plain shoot stuff, the Soviet Union lagged in almost everything else (agriculture, transportation, distribution, economics, information technology, etc.). The classic example is how the Soviet Union completely missed the boat on the digital computer. It's telling that one of the most enduring myths (true or not) hailing Soviet science and engineering is that in solving complex problems the Soviets would often come up with more rudimentary solutions than their Western counterparts. Another way of looking at it is that they couldn't do it any other way. One wonders why... Finally, in response to your point of shining light, when both space programs are looked at in their entirety, the American space program was always far more ambitious and successful in its goals. The Soviet space program captured some firsts that were good for propaganda but essentially meaningless in the long run. The American program came up with 4 interstellar probes, took men to the moon, successfully deployed GPS, explored Mars, explored Venus, deployed a space telescope, pioneered and established space based earth watching and probably plenty of other stuff I can't remember. In contrast, the Soviet program explored Venus to some extent, though being completely eclipsed by the American program when it finally turned its attention to the planet, and pioneered long term space habitation in Mir which the American program never matched. That's about it.
It's arguable that Soviet Russia's early space prowess was more a matter of early momentum than any ongoing scientific achievement.
Army spends 15 years developing a system that looks good on paper and kind of works in exercises but your grunts hate because they don't see the point. 1 year into a real war and jaded grunts begin to see the advantages of the system while the designers learn how to make it more useful. Sounds like iterative design to me! Take that you UML/waterfall supporters!
The dirty little secret is that the people behind it appear to be in Slovakia and potentially in Canada.
Clearly more than e-mails were stolen. When I received both e-mail and snail mail stock flipping spam I traced the information down to addresses in Slovakia and Canada (which I promptly fed the SEC who probably never did anything about it considering that the spammers managed to register and flip a completely bogus company within 3 months flat). A spammer in Slovakia won't have much to do with SSNs except sell them.
It's a matter of time before those "unaccessed SSNs" are sold if they haven't been already.
There is no incentive for TDAmeritrade to do anything about this because they figure they won't be found responsible for identity thefts that will occur as a result (go trace them back to Slovakia). It's enough for them to stop fraudulent access to their accounts.
Shame on Ameritrade for being so careless and callous.
Slashdot Mirror
Amen. Mod galoise up. It's not the idea or the first semi-working prototype that matters. It is the first commercially viable and successful invention that matters - because that is the invention that eventually changes the world.
So I guess it makes perfect sense to have such a scanner in your car to ensure you are who you say you are. On busses, trains, at stores, amusement parks and football games, right?
Who you are has no bearing on whether you are carrying a weapon or not. It does not make one iota of difference who you are if you are not carrying any weapons. Furthermore, circumvention of this "security" measure is easy - get a fake ID (which is always possible) or send someone who is below the radar.
For this non-security you've created a wonderful snooping tool that the government can and will abuse in time regardless of how many times they say "trust us".
I think at this point you are choosing between the lesser of two harms. I think most people would agree that banning fatty foods or most sports is more harmful than dealing with the consequences. But this appears to be a different discussion than the one started.
The amount of the health tax you are currently paying takes into account that most people wear seatbelts. If most people didn't wear seatbelts, your taxes/healtcare premiums would go up even if you wore a seatbelt. So you are being harmed by someone else not wearing a seatbelt.
You can slice it many ways to keep health taxes where they are. You could use the original way I mentioned. You could argue that people not wearing seatbelts still get health benefits but up to a certain limit while seatbelted people have higher limits or none at all.
You can go to all these great lengths or you can legislate a simple and cheap law.
helmets and seatbelts you are placing the cost of your healthcare on the public. Hence you are harming someone. You can argue that you could be given the choice of not wearing a helmet or seatbelt with the understanding that you waive any right to care you can't pay for if you are injured in an accident.
Insider trading does harm others. You are very literally stealing money from other people.
C'mon, can't you come up with something better?
You must mean that in the sense that the ISP sold you "unlimited" bandwidth and it can't deliver on it's promise, right?
Sounds like fraud on the ISP's part. Not customer abuse.
No, there is a fundamental difference in your example. In one (the O.J/ISP case), there is no adverse effect to anyone in the world. In the case of speeding on a freeway you are hurting others.
It's a fundamental principle. If you are not hurting anyone why should it be proscribed? (e.g. smoking pot, gay sex in Texas, watching/selling porn, etc.) BTW someone not turning a profit for lack of artificial laws is not being "hurt".
"with ISP you've specifically agreed you wont do that. Get some integrity!"
And if an O.J company wrote on their boxes that by buying their juice you agree to not sharing it with your friends you stick to that integrity?
You bought it, it's yours, you can do what you please with it.
Someone started running his own DHCP server on it and caused other random disruptions. I've moved since so I may consider re-opening it.
He may be a great program manager but if I were Adobe I would stop him from blogging as quickly as I could. Here are some choice quotes from his responses to user comments. With responses like these I wouldn't believe anything he has to say:
[Are you saying you can't figure out how to remove applications? That's really saying something. --J.]
[You're a complete moron, and I don't have time to bother poking holes in your litany of ridiculous assertions. --J.]
[Sorry to hear that things aren't going well, Ryan. Have you called tech support? If not, why not? --J.]
[What sucks is how gullible, lazy, and reckless people prove to be. --J.]
And on and on it goes...
They should now make the obvious follow-up study and let their subjects watch select porn and measure its transformative effect on the brain.
Of course, the results probably wouldn't be as popular or easy to write a press release about - porn makes people happy!
All these people were killed by psychopathically violent people.
People are not just miraculously killed by "regimes" or blood thirsty leaders, the murder is always carried out by plenty of willing executioners who relish the violence and power.
People are grotesquely violent given the opportunity - video games have nothing to do with it.
Like the millions murdered under Stalin ... ... ...
The >.5 million in Darfur
The >.5 million in Rwanda
1 million Armenians under the Turks
Oh wait, they didn't have video games...
It may be termed a "donation" but that doesn't make it less than a mandatory payment. As an example, look at the wealth amassed by the Catholic/Anglican church and tell me nobody is paying for their salvation.
The ultimate snake-oil.
People contribute their life savings, sacrifice their lives, their children and often murder others in the name of fantastic fictional characters and their self declared human representatives who promise them favors in this life or the next in return.
The gadgets in this article are amateur jobs compared to the scam that is religion.
This is a solution looking for a problem...
I really should stop replying to myself...
Another important metric is the impact of the bug on the customer. Is the customer shutdown and out of business until the bug is fixed or is it primarily a cosmetic bug or a bug with many workarounds?
Forgot one more important item.
I don't know what your role is from the post but it is the engineer's task to provide a fix as quickly as possible (within the constraints of having a life, etc.) if that is what the manager wants. Though tempting and quite distracting, it is ultimately not the engineer's role to ponder the customer's reason. The engineer should provide his manager an assessment of the time required for the fix (in his role) and its associated risk.
It's up to the manager (or higher ups) to decide, given the engineering assessments (of dev, QA, etc), if providing the fix quickly is realistic and acceptably risky or not.
The answer to your question is - "it depends". /.
It depends on too many unknowns that may take you longer than 48 hours to explain on
The overall size of your code base is a meaningless metric - it could be a beautifully architected masterpiece that is easy to tweak and modify or lots of little pieces with relatively few interactions or it could be a 20 Mloc ball of spaghetti.
What is the complexity of the specific code with the bug?
What is the source of the bug? Is it easily reproducible? Is the location of the bug known?
Is the buggy code relatively insulated from the rest of the codebase or is it central to the entire product (think my_very_specific_function_for_twiddling_diddles() vs. printf()).
If you fix the bug wrong how many other parts of the code could be affected?
What are the ramifications of screwing up the fix beyond embarrassment?
Unless you know all of these, it is arguable you are not prepared to answer if the customer is being realistic (as opposed to reasonable).
I recall this worked for railroads but it may be applicable to other elements as well.
When the city starts clamoring for railroads just build them anywhere in a big clump (even in the corner of the map where they are not accessible or leading to anything). This way everyone is happy you have a railroad and they don't get in the way of anything - SimCity even simulates pork barrel projects!
And yet you firmly believe that these same business customers who are relying on a 16-years-old software really need to upgrade to the latest and greatest Windows OS?!
No, the customers with the 16-years-old software will not change anything in their configuration and that includes the OS. Unless of course, MS makes it impossible for them to do.
See the ozone hole in near realtime thanks to NASA:
http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/
And yet the Soviet Union couldn't feed its population. A few token achievements in a few narrow fields over a short period of time don't a scientific empire make.
The Soviet Union eventually fell apart because it couldn't keep up with the scientific innovation of the free world. While it may have been sexy to shoot stuff into space or to just plain shoot stuff, the Soviet Union lagged in almost everything else (agriculture, transportation, distribution, economics, information technology, etc.). The classic example is how the Soviet Union completely missed the boat on the digital computer.
It's telling that one of the most enduring myths (true or not) hailing Soviet science and engineering is that in solving complex problems the Soviets would often come up with more rudimentary solutions than their Western counterparts. Another way of looking at it is that they couldn't do it any other way. One wonders why...
Finally, in response to your point of shining light, when both space programs are looked at in their entirety, the American space program was always far more ambitious and successful in its goals. The Soviet space program captured some firsts that were good for propaganda but essentially meaningless in the long run.
The American program came up with 4 interstellar probes, took men to the moon, successfully deployed GPS, explored Mars, explored Venus, deployed a space telescope, pioneered and established space based earth watching and probably plenty of other stuff I can't remember.
In contrast, the Soviet program explored Venus to some extent, though being completely eclipsed by the American program when it finally turned its attention to the planet, and pioneered long term space habitation in Mir which the American program never matched. That's about it.
It's arguable that Soviet Russia's early space prowess was more a matter of early momentum than any ongoing scientific achievement.
Army spends 15 years developing a system that looks good on paper and kind of works in exercises but your grunts hate because they don't see the point.
1 year into a real war and jaded grunts begin to see the advantages of the system while the designers learn how to make it more useful.
Sounds like iterative design to me!
Take that you UML/waterfall supporters!
The dirty little secret is that the people behind it appear to be in Slovakia and potentially in Canada.
Clearly more than e-mails were stolen. When I received both e-mail and snail mail stock flipping spam I traced the information down to addresses in Slovakia and Canada (which I promptly fed the SEC who probably never did anything about it considering that the spammers managed to register and flip a completely bogus company within 3 months flat). A spammer in Slovakia won't have much to do with SSNs except sell them.
It's a matter of time before those "unaccessed SSNs" are sold if they haven't been already.
There is no incentive for TDAmeritrade to do anything about this because they figure they won't be found responsible for identity thefts that will occur as a result (go trace them back to Slovakia). It's enough for them to stop fraudulent access to their accounts.
Shame on Ameritrade for being so careless and callous.