Well I'd say now a days it is probably more due to advertisement. Keeping the song around 3min gives you enough time to play 3 "songs" do a weather update and the plug boner pills again.
Also probably due to the genre but one of my favorite bands, Opeth, has an average song length of probably 9min. They have a whole bunch of songs 12+ min long. I've never heard them on radio but did hear an a snippet from one of their softer songs in a CSI episode I think it was. I don't listen to the radio because generally it doesn't play the type of music I like. Sure with online I could search around for a station somewhere that plays it but being online I can just listen to the things I like in the first place.
I think radio is an outdated medium at least for music. For discussions and such it can be okay, but then again that can also be replaced by podcasts.
Can't you both be right? price changes tend to happen in chunks throughout the supply chain. Your aluminum is $2/kg from the supplier and then one day they tell you it is now $2.25. You suck it up for a while but then when they raise it again to $2.35 you finally say now we need to charge the customer more. That is why everything in Walmart can be *.97, you don't see a whole bunch of 1.36 products etc. prices move (stupid new keyboard is defective p apparently doesn't work with the shift key, nice) because they retailer has a pricing model, whether it be a standard ending on the end of prices, or "brackets" they place different categories of goods into etc.
I agree though: taxes on profits not total revenue does help a lot though. Same thing with the personal tax rate. When people say you can raise the top bracket it is just silly. 1) If you were making $300k and they changed the tax rate would you chose to stop at say $200k so you wouldn't hit the new high bracket or would you "settle" for making $275k this year? people tend to get used to making a certain amount and plan their spending accordingly. Which means they are still highly incentivized to earn (before tax) at least as much as before the tax rate hike. 2) A lot of high earners aren't making their money by salary: they are "choosing" to make X amount of money every year regardless of the tax rate. How much they keep and how much the tax man gets doesn't really affect them much. The investments, creative works whatever are already done. New investments needing bank loans might be another issue but that is what equity is for. If equity does get spread out because they can't get favorable loans, it will likely go at favorable multiples, which means the same revenue gets split more ways, less people in the top bracket and we get a more balances wealth distribution with fewer and fewer people hitting the "unfair" high bracket.
Also how often do you upgrade the software. If it is only once every 6mth-year or whatever is the cost of the setup going to pay for itself? If you run wires where are they going to go? If not how are you getting a wifi card into all these devices (are they configurable enough to do it, etc? What is the current process is this guy working after hours or doing one at a time at a gas station that is still operating? They might not like it so much if you close all the pumps at once for 20min vs only one at a time for 3 hrs.
I don't know if I'd blame the manufacturer. They couldn't exactly run ethernet under ground at a gas station very easily. Could have used wifi I suppose but flaky/some people are freaked out using phones around gas stations (might cause a spark, kaboom) so knowing they have a built in "cell phone" would make those nutjobs more paranoid than they are already. How often is this software updated? It might just be that, sorry to say, the posters time is of neglible value vs the cost of deploying and maintaining a network: remember networks have issues too. They probably don't trust a random guy they hire to do the upgrades to have the skills to figure out their software + any networking issues that pop up. Not sure wasn't clear if the poster is a true "IT" guy or an installer monkey. Installer monkeys are cheap you just have to keep the systems they play with very simple. Anyways, not clear what the business decision on the deployment was, might have made sense at the time.
+1 to notification crap. You can disable it but I'm amazed at the software that thinks it needs to startup an updater on boot just in case a new version is available. In my case at work: java, adobe, graphics driver etc. You can disable most of it but I agree it is stupid. My graphics card is particularly spammy( "you might not be planning on using it, but just in case, we really really need to let you know we have a driver that will give you a 5% improvement on Dirt 4"). Once a week or more it gives me an update notification.
Nivida: I like to stay up to date but I'm sorry I really don't care about your point-point release as in 187.02.03. Apps IMO should only check for updates when they are actually used (hard to get around the graphics driver I guess) and even then I think it should be limited to once a month or something.
Well they get away with it I think because they can stop supporting older hardware should they hit a limit vs the Windows ecosystem where you have people buying everything from $200-10k workstations/laptops.
They haven't stopped supporting systems for a long time though, my home desktop is a 2009 iMac and I was able to install Yosemite on it no problem. Didn't find that much difference performance wise from Lion, I guess slow is slow:). New system (Dell XPS 15 maxed out) comes on Tuesday so back to a reasonable system at home again for while. Non-SSD is so hard to tolerate once you get used to it.
Well for registry file, we'll see, I think it might only be for universal apps but win 10 is supposed to have a virtual registry similar to how WoW works. An app sees a registry but in actuality it is a private clone of the registry. When the app is uninstalled the OS just blasts away that clone and no cruft is left. At least that is the theory. For the desktop user, I think Mac has the cleanest installation process. Drag and drop. Things are installed in a single folder. Drag and drop the app to the trash and it is gone. For the power user: debian like is my favorite: apt-get is great. But still always having to remember what's in bin, whats in sbin, etc etc. Things do get scattered all over the place in Linux. Oddly it is the command line friendly OS that requires a lot of jumping between directories (which is a pain in the ass from command line) to get anything done. VS windows where everything is pretty much dumped in the windows folder and or available in the ui from a single (albeit huge) widget (control panel).
Both right. I have a late 2009 iMac bootcamped to Win 8.1 pro. 1-2min before I can start opening up my own applications (have autohotkeys, and iTunes autostarting). But at work, SSD box. The system restarts faster than the monitor can detect that the computer has dropped the connection (~10-15 restart from desktop-bounce-login screen). I log in and as fast as I can get a mouse over a shortcut the computer is responsive. It all comes down to hardware at that level particularly ssd vs hdd.
There is also the "fast enough" metric. Mac users generally have mid to high end equipment. Chances are "slower than windows" for them is probably still plenty snappy. It is like the aero, vs OS X versus lightweight and snappy on a 1990's laptop debate: if you have the money to buy the hardware and feel more comfortable with the UI design, available software, heck just want transparency effects or whatever: who cares? It is a matter of preference. We are like whinny car nuts debating the merits of Ford vs Chevy trucks. It's a box you put shit into, if you are happy with it that is good enough I don't have to prove mine is better.
Some laws have budgetary impact so are somewhat logically linked to a budget. Example: if the government decides to make university free it is an expense they must budget for. I can see that getting added in to the budget (after the idea has been kicked around for a while as an independent bill). Go through committees get a pretty polished version ready, tack it on to the budget and get the funds allocated for it at the same time. The copyright issue though: kind of silly. Shouldn't affect the budget much either the original artist gets money, or the new artist that remixes it does, or for the most part it is something relatively small sales (say the Platters discography becomes public... wow 10k best of albums don't get sold/taxed this year). Regardless, the copyright issue should be separate from its impact on government revenues: the law doesn't exist to provide income to the government but to "promote culture".
Add to that, the vast majority of revenue is going to foreign corporations and/or Canadians now living as ex-pats our government should have little interest in becoming record industry shills.
Who cares if an artist outlives their copyright? You can easily outlive your patents why is someone making a jingle more important than someone making an new gadget?
A bricklayer might find themselves fired and or sued too. Non-compete/"not a loyal employee". If you are a bricklayer and someone you know is looking for some work done you are supposed to recommend your employer's business like a good little doggy.
All or most of these posts assume US laws (or US like laws). Your neighbour to the north for example as exactly the opposite policy: employees own their work unless it was explicitly assigned. Your employer has a right to use your software they don't own the copyright or can control how you chose to license/sell it.
In my experience even if your boss doesn't care often they aren't willing to put any effort/burn political capital to get the higher ups to approve it. Your mileage might vary.
For example my last job I made a utility that talked to a vendors software and collected some data we needed to comply with government regulations. That vendor knew of another site that needed the same software and wanted to buy a copy from us. Anyways, the employer (a hospital) even had an IP consultant come through to see different projects that might be commercializable come through. After a week or so of onsite interviews, filling out the invonvation paperwork (forget what the proper term was for it), having a customer already lined up etc etc. Still couldn't convince my boss to chat with his boss to get it to go forward. He didn't seem to mind the idea, but also no one wanted to own the liablity if something went wrong, wanted the hassle of figuring out who gets paid what (unlike the US in my country the employee owns the IP of the stuff they create unless explicitly assigned in their employee contract (I wasn't hired as a software developer/had no ownship transfer in my contract)). Anyways, I could of just tried doing it on the side but would have all the hassles of a business including significant liablity exposure should something break. Also wanted to keep it internal since I'd already been paid to make the code/didn't want to piss of my employer. Still: can be an upward battle: pretty much by definition anyone working at a government job/for someone else doesn't want the hassle of dealing with all the business processes themselves (you might like sales but hate legal, might like product development but be antisocial, etc, few people enjoy the whole process).
We have "build" machines too. They get hijacked to run CI workloads. Typically 8-16 jobs running concurrently 24-7. They build -> then trigger smoke, other, security, migration etc testing.
Often we compile several times locally in the process of getting things working. Sadly highly coupled code between C# and tsql/db code. You need to migrate and build/run tests locally to have any hope of pushing something to a CI/build server that has a hope in hell of not breaking everything.
Anyways, I like having a high end local desktop, but then again I'm running webserver, db, and client workloads simulatanously on my local machine. 32GB ram, typically > 16GB in use at any given time. Without it we'd need to have dedicated dbs on servers we could migrate ourselves without any conflicts with any other users as we muck with stored procs and such.
These huge number of core server CPUs other than for big stuff like non-scale out db workloads and such are kind of silly. For the last 15 years at least they've been trying to sell us on the idea that everyone wants to go back to having thin clients with VMs hosted on fat dense servers. The only one that wants that are the accountants. Then if you take into account productivity it might be a wash. Especially since clock for clock server hardware is probably ~4X more expensive.
No it isn't tramatic just a waste of time. Especially when a couple people come over to your desk and want you to check something on another branch. Checkout, deploy database. Then build. Then when switching back need to build again. So 3 people sitting around waiting for a progress bar.
I've lived the HPC game too. In those days for me at least it was 5% dev and 95% reading/writing journal articles, books, either triggering or automating compute job configurations etc. Very little code but running for 200k+ cpu hours.
Sun back in the day, not sure if they still do it, used to offer servers with say half of the cores disabled. You could buy licenses and they'd turn on the extra cores without even needing a reboot. They offer different price points even if it means they waste some good cores disabling them to make an artificial performance different its still better for them than to have to make a different design/fab for each step in the process. The lifetime of a chip architecture/manufacturing process is so short that building n lines to make n products would be crazy expensive.
Exactly. Not that it would likely be worth it for my employer, even with salary accounted for, but my work project has 25 subprojects that need to be built but a max depth of 5 I think in the dependency graph. So could reduce my full builds from ~1min 5-10 times a day to say 10s 5-10 times a day. But usually I can multitask: do another once over the pending changes, etc. So the time isn't usually wasted anyways.
Yeah and it isn't just recruiting it is the whole industry. I'm constantly questioning. Are we using the right tools? If we are are they tools that are common enough that I'll be employable somewhere else? Then recruiting messages come in and they have a few languages or whatever I'm not using: should I spend time learning them just in case I decide to move? We have no stability in this industry. A surgeon that learns how to replace a knee can do the surgery the same way for a couple decades before being forced to do it a different way. Us every 6 months or so one of our languages/servers/OSs etc change and we need to re-evaluate everything again.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I'd say now a days it is probably more due to advertisement. Keeping the song around 3min gives you enough time to play 3 "songs" do a weather update and the plug boner pills again.
Also probably due to the genre but one of my favorite bands, Opeth, has an average song length of probably 9min. They have a whole bunch of songs 12+ min long. I've never heard them on radio but did hear an a snippet from one of their softer songs in a CSI episode I think it was. I don't listen to the radio because generally it doesn't play the type of music I like. Sure with online I could search around for a station somewhere that plays it but being online I can just listen to the things I like in the first place.
I think radio is an outdated medium at least for music. For discussions and such it can be okay, but then again that can also be replaced by podcasts.
Plus it is a good place to dump your "photos" that you don't really care too much about if they were to be lost and you had to "take" them again.
You mean you've never repaired a fileserver while drunk?
Can't you both be right? price changes tend to happen in chunks throughout the supply chain. Your aluminum is $2/kg from the supplier and then one day they tell you it is now $2.25. You suck it up for a while but then when they raise it again to $2.35 you finally say now we need to charge the customer more. That is why everything in Walmart can be *.97, you don't see a whole bunch of 1.36 products etc. prices move (stupid new keyboard is defective p apparently doesn't work with the shift key, nice) because they retailer has a pricing model, whether it be a standard ending on the end of prices, or "brackets" they place different categories of goods into etc.
I agree though: taxes on profits not total revenue does help a lot though. Same thing with the personal tax rate. When people say you can raise the top bracket it is just silly. 1) If you were making $300k and they changed the tax rate would you chose to stop at say $200k so you wouldn't hit the new high bracket or would you "settle" for making $275k this year? people tend to get used to making a certain amount and plan their spending accordingly. Which means they are still highly incentivized to earn (before tax) at least as much as before the tax rate hike. 2) A lot of high earners aren't making their money by salary: they are "choosing" to make X amount of money every year regardless of the tax rate. How much they keep and how much the tax man gets doesn't really affect them much. The investments, creative works whatever are already done. New investments needing bank loans might be another issue but that is what equity is for. If equity does get spread out because they can't get favorable loans, it will likely go at favorable multiples, which means the same revenue gets split more ways, less people in the top bracket and we get a more balances wealth distribution with fewer and fewer people hitting the "unfair" high bracket.
Also how often do you upgrade the software. If it is only once every 6mth-year or whatever is the cost of the setup going to pay for itself? If you run wires where are they going to go? If not how are you getting a wifi card into all these devices (are they configurable enough to do it, etc? What is the current process is this guy working after hours or doing one at a time at a gas station that is still operating? They might not like it so much if you close all the pumps at once for 20min vs only one at a time for 3 hrs.
I don't know if I'd blame the manufacturer. They couldn't exactly run ethernet under ground at a gas station very easily. Could have used wifi I suppose but flaky/some people are freaked out using phones around gas stations (might cause a spark, kaboom) so knowing they have a built in "cell phone" would make those nutjobs more paranoid than they are already. How often is this software updated? It might just be that, sorry to say, the posters time is of neglible value vs the cost of deploying and maintaining a network: remember networks have issues too. They probably don't trust a random guy they hire to do the upgrades to have the skills to figure out their software + any networking issues that pop up. Not sure wasn't clear if the poster is a true "IT" guy or an installer monkey. Installer monkeys are cheap you just have to keep the systems they play with very simple. Anyways, not clear what the business decision on the deployment was, might have made sense at the time.
+1 to notification crap. You can disable it but I'm amazed at the software that thinks it needs to startup an updater on boot just in case a new version is available. In my case at work: java, adobe, graphics driver etc. You can disable most of it but I agree it is stupid. My graphics card is particularly spammy( "you might not be planning on using it, but just in case, we really really need to let you know we have a driver that will give you a 5% improvement on Dirt 4"). Once a week or more it gives me an update notification.
Nivida: I like to stay up to date but I'm sorry I really don't care about your point-point release as in 187.02.03. Apps IMO should only check for updates when they are actually used (hard to get around the graphics driver I guess) and even then I think it should be limited to once a month or something.
Well they get away with it I think because they can stop supporting older hardware should they hit a limit vs the Windows ecosystem where you have people buying everything from $200-10k workstations/laptops.
They haven't stopped supporting systems for a long time though, my home desktop is a 2009 iMac and I was able to install Yosemite on it no problem. Didn't find that much difference performance wise from Lion, I guess slow is slow :). New system (Dell XPS 15 maxed out) comes on Tuesday so back to a reasonable system at home again for while. Non-SSD is so hard to tolerate once you get used to it.
Well for registry file, we'll see, I think it might only be for universal apps but win 10 is supposed to have a virtual registry similar to how WoW works. An app sees a registry but in actuality it is a private clone of the registry. When the app is uninstalled the OS just blasts away that clone and no cruft is left. At least that is the theory. For the desktop user, I think Mac has the cleanest installation process. Drag and drop. Things are installed in a single folder. Drag and drop the app to the trash and it is gone. For the power user: debian like is my favorite: apt-get is great. But still always having to remember what's in bin, whats in sbin, etc etc. Things do get scattered all over the place in Linux. Oddly it is the command line friendly OS that requires a lot of jumping between directories (which is a pain in the ass from command line) to get anything done. VS windows where everything is pretty much dumped in the windows folder and or available in the ui from a single (albeit huge) widget (control panel).
Probably because it supports a lot of .Net functionality.
Both right. I have a late 2009 iMac bootcamped to Win 8.1 pro. 1-2min before I can start opening up my own applications (have autohotkeys, and iTunes autostarting). But at work, SSD box. The system restarts faster than the monitor can detect that the computer has dropped the connection (~10-15 restart from desktop-bounce-login screen). I log in and as fast as I can get a mouse over a shortcut the computer is responsive. It all comes down to hardware at that level particularly ssd vs hdd.
There is also the "fast enough" metric. Mac users generally have mid to high end equipment. Chances are "slower than windows" for them is probably still plenty snappy. It is like the aero, vs OS X versus lightweight and snappy on a 1990's laptop debate: if you have the money to buy the hardware and feel more comfortable with the UI design, available software, heck just want transparency effects or whatever: who cares? It is a matter of preference. We are like whinny car nuts debating the merits of Ford vs Chevy trucks. It's a box you put shit into, if you are happy with it that is good enough I don't have to prove mine is better.
Some laws have budgetary impact so are somewhat logically linked to a budget. Example: if the government decides to make university free it is an expense they must budget for. I can see that getting added in to the budget (after the idea has been kicked around for a while as an independent bill). Go through committees get a pretty polished version ready, tack it on to the budget and get the funds allocated for it at the same time. The copyright issue though: kind of silly. Shouldn't affect the budget much either the original artist gets money, or the new artist that remixes it does, or for the most part it is something relatively small sales (say the Platters discography becomes public ... wow 10k best of albums don't get sold/taxed this year). Regardless, the copyright issue should be separate from its impact on government revenues: the law doesn't exist to provide income to the government but to "promote culture".
Add to that, the vast majority of revenue is going to foreign corporations and/or Canadians now living as ex-pats our government should have little interest in becoming record industry shills.
Who cares if an artist outlives their copyright? You can easily outlive your patents why is someone making a jingle more important than someone making an new gadget?
A bricklayer might find themselves fired and or sued too. Non-compete/"not a loyal employee". If you are a bricklayer and someone you know is looking for some work done you are supposed to recommend your employer's business like a good little doggy.
All or most of these posts assume US laws (or US like laws). Your neighbour to the north for example as exactly the opposite policy: employees own their work unless it was explicitly assigned. Your employer has a right to use your software they don't own the copyright or can control how you chose to license/sell it.
In my experience even if your boss doesn't care often they aren't willing to put any effort/burn political capital to get the higher ups to approve it. Your mileage might vary.
For example my last job I made a utility that talked to a vendors software and collected some data we needed to comply with government regulations. That vendor knew of another site that needed the same software and wanted to buy a copy from us. Anyways, the employer (a hospital) even had an IP consultant come through to see different projects that might be commercializable come through. After a week or so of onsite interviews, filling out the invonvation paperwork (forget what the proper term was for it), having a customer already lined up etc etc. Still couldn't convince my boss to chat with his boss to get it to go forward. He didn't seem to mind the idea, but also no one wanted to own the liablity if something went wrong, wanted the hassle of figuring out who gets paid what (unlike the US in my country the employee owns the IP of the stuff they create unless explicitly assigned in their employee contract (I wasn't hired as a software developer/had no ownship transfer in my contract)). Anyways, I could of just tried doing it on the side but would have all the hassles of a business including significant liablity exposure should something break. Also wanted to keep it internal since I'd already been paid to make the code/didn't want to piss of my employer. Still: can be an upward battle: pretty much by definition anyone working at a government job/for someone else doesn't want the hassle of dealing with all the business processes themselves (you might like sales but hate legal, might like product development but be antisocial, etc, few people enjoy the whole process).
Male prostitute, your boss won't mind if you lay down on the job.
Yeah usually the boring ones. I'd work on an assembly line before I'd spend my day crawling under desks fishing out ethernet cables.
Agreed on the ram. When DDR4 hits the mainstream product lines that is going to be a nice bump.
We have "build" machines too. They get hijacked to run CI workloads. Typically 8-16 jobs running concurrently 24-7. They build -> then trigger smoke, other, security, migration etc testing.
Often we compile several times locally in the process of getting things working. Sadly highly coupled code between C# and tsql/db code. You need to migrate and build/run tests locally to have any hope of pushing something to a CI/build server that has a hope in hell of not breaking everything.
Anyways, I like having a high end local desktop, but then again I'm running webserver, db, and client workloads simulatanously on my local machine. 32GB ram, typically > 16GB in use at any given time. Without it we'd need to have dedicated dbs on servers we could migrate ourselves without any conflicts with any other users as we muck with stored procs and such.
These huge number of core server CPUs other than for big stuff like non-scale out db workloads and such are kind of silly. For the last 15 years at least they've been trying to sell us on the idea that everyone wants to go back to having thin clients with VMs hosted on fat dense servers. The only one that wants that are the accountants. Then if you take into account productivity it might be a wash. Especially since clock for clock server hardware is probably ~4X more expensive.
No it isn't tramatic just a waste of time. Especially when a couple people come over to your desk and want you to check something on another branch. Checkout, deploy database. Then build. Then when switching back need to build again. So 3 people sitting around waiting for a progress bar.
I've lived the HPC game too. In those days for me at least it was 5% dev and 95% reading/writing journal articles, books, either triggering or automating compute job configurations etc. Very little code but running for 200k+ cpu hours.
Sun back in the day, not sure if they still do it, used to offer servers with say half of the cores disabled. You could buy licenses and they'd turn on the extra cores without even needing a reboot. They offer different price points even if it means they waste some good cores disabling them to make an artificial performance different its still better for them than to have to make a different design/fab for each step in the process. The lifetime of a chip architecture/manufacturing process is so short that building n lines to make n products would be crazy expensive.
Exactly. Not that it would likely be worth it for my employer, even with salary accounted for, but my work project has 25 subprojects that need to be built but a max depth of 5 I think in the dependency graph. So could reduce my full builds from ~1min 5-10 times a day to say 10s 5-10 times a day. But usually I can multitask: do another once over the pending changes, etc. So the time isn't usually wasted anyways.
Yeah and it isn't just recruiting it is the whole industry. I'm constantly questioning. Are we using the right tools? If we are are they tools that are common enough that I'll be employable somewhere else? Then recruiting messages come in and they have a few languages or whatever I'm not using: should I spend time learning them just in case I decide to move? We have no stability in this industry. A surgeon that learns how to replace a knee can do the surgery the same way for a couple decades before being forced to do it a different way. Us every 6 months or so one of our languages/servers/OSs etc change and we need to re-evaluate everything again.