What this law is designed to do (and needs to be done in Vancouver BC, Seattle WA, Portland Oregon, and San Francisco California) is stop people from hoarding property from the people who live in the city and need that property.
The obvious solution to a shortage of housing is to BUILD MORE HOUSING. Last year, SF rejected 95% of all building permit requests, and most people don't even bother to submit a request. Despite soaring demand, the number of new housing units is near zero. So the result is high prices. Duh. NYC and other cities are not much better. The problem is driven by NIMBY and BANANA voters. It is absurd to blame this on Airbnb.
You're missing the point. The issue is _not_ a genuine shortage of residential housing. The issue is speculators gobbling up residential properties and turning them into permanent short-term rentals via Airbnb and similar web sites. This artificially reduces the stock of available residential property for people who actually live and work in the city and need a full-time home; and it drives up the prices/rental of the properties that remain.
This kind of legislation is becoming increasingly common here in Europe too. It's still perfectly legal to rent out your spare bedroom via Airbnb; but not an entire property that you don't actually live in yourself. And most people are fine with that. The only people complaining are the ones who were trying to create short-term rental empires.
There are plenty of other options for tourists and business travelers who just need somewhere to sleep and shower for a week or two. It's about prioritising people who live, work and pay their taxes locally, over folks just passing through and property speculators. And rightly so. Even Airbnb says it's about people "sharing their own homes", not running a full-time rental business.
I mean, the video is already on your computer. If they shut down internet service, it'll move client-side. Hell, if I wanted I could output the video/audio of my screen and record them.
It's futile. They know it and we know it. But I guess the shareholders or the lawyer are just not happy if Google doesn't do anything about it. So they do this.
IANAL but I suggest that they are doing this to protect themselves from litigation. There's nothing to stop _you_ saving the stream of bits coming direct from youtube to _your_ computer onto _your_ hard drive. But a third party publicly offering a service whereby they retrieve the bits on your behalf, parcel them up, and then make them available to you is a different legal situation altogether.
Terminals/shells that support bracketed paste mode don't have this problem.
When you paste something, it won't execute until you press enter. This helps avoid issues with mistake pastes, and also issues wherein one accidentally copies a newline with the desired text (in this case, you can hit backspace to delete the newline, continue editing the command, and hit enter only when you're done).
There's a ZSH plugin that adds this functionality:
On Windows, if you use ConEmu to manage your shell sessions it will block execution of pastes that contain a Return character (regardless of which shell you are running; works with both cmd.exe and bash) and will warn you about the embedded Return.
Britain has a problem with the building trade, in particular the self-employed small business building trade. It's why there are TV shows like Cowboy Builders, and bad building work is commonly on other programmes like Watchdog and so on.
There's a real problem in the British building trade. There was a TV documentary a few years ago about Brits working across the EU. A couple of the guys interviewed were a plasterer and an electrician.
They were earning good money and had a good lifestyle, so the interviewer asked them what they would say to builders back home who might be thinking about doing the same thing. The guys said "If you don't have your City & Guilds certifications, don't bother coming. You can get hired on building sites in the UK with no qualifications, but over here that simply won't happen".
After 20 years in the business, I spend MUCH more time thinking about the problem and the best solutions than I do actually coding. If you're spending most of your time coding, that's probably mostly code I'll delete in a couple of years whwn I do it in a simpler, more elegant way.
This is exactly right. Today you can do more with fewer lines of code than ever before. The real value is in the thought process around *which* lines of code to write.
I've coded in node.js for a couple of years now, written some semi-big pieces of software to do real-time message passing/transaction processing stuff. It was fine. It's better than PHP, which I moved from. It's better than writing cgi-bin programs in C++, which is how I started. On of the big reasons to use node.js is it nicely integrates alternative protocols like WebSockets, RTC, AMPQ, so you can roll up a "web server plus other protocol" system that gets a lot of jobs done you just can't accomplish with PHP/Apache.
Well that's not really a big selling point. In the last couple of years I've worked on Java and Python projects that used WebSockets, RTC, AMQP, NoSQL databases, etc. Not only are these protocols well supported but in both cases you get a much richer and more robust platform to work on.
People love to hate on Javascript because they don't like admitting the language wars are over, and Javascript won. When you can walk into a room and ask "How many people have a compiler on them _right now_." and people answer "I've got at least two!" Try that with any other language. Compilers shipped, lines written, active users... JS wins on all metrics. It's not the "best" language, but then, what is?
And this is frankly misleading. Yes there's lots of Javascript code around, bit it's primarily on the client side. One of the biggest issues I've seen with node.js is the number of people who have only ever coded Javascript UIs, but who think that with node.js they can put "Server-side developer" on their CVs. It doesn't work that way. Backend development is an entirely different proposition.
I have hired over-40 programmers who were rockstars, and some over-40 workers who just could not deliver.
Age is just one variable among many, but people obsess over it because it is easier to ballpark someone's age in an interview than it is to get a read on other indicators of talent.
The biggest problem is that over-40 workers are universally more expensive than the 20's workers. They all want to jump in at the senior level, and feel justified in this based on their experience. This makes them a bigger risk to take, and ultimately more expensive if they don't pan out.
On the other hand, too much investment in kids results in software that works upfront but absolutely does not scale, and winds up full of ticking time bombs.
I think the money thing is a big issue alright. Apart from the knowledge and experience they bring, the over-40s have mortgages to pay and kids to put through college so working for entry level salaries is not an option. Like with offshoring, many employers assume that 3 cheap (but inexperienced) developers for the price of one expensive (but experienced) developer is a good deal. It isn't; it's a false economy.
A couple other things I've seen. Employers who assume that the brain ossifies at 40 and that "old dogs" are incapable of learning new tricks. We aren't. I'm continually learning new skills. And then there are folks who are concerned about managing developers who are older and more experienced than they are. A bit of honesty and respect goes a long way; we've seen most "management du jour" fads and we know that most of them are BS.
If you treat us greybeards right we can be surprisingly good value for money.:-)
I was just talking to an old Co-Worker from a C++ company I worked at a few years back. He asked "So what are you doing lately" and I told him I'm working on my thesis, which is titled "Ruby's a Terrible Programming Language, And You're A Terrible Programmer For Liking It". Then I cited a number of my complaints -- being able to add arbitrary functions to a live object, never knowing where to look for the interface definition of parameter objects, need to extensively test all execution paths of production code (Which no one ever does,) odd syntactic quirks and changes in syntax between language versions. He laughed and said he had exactly the same complaints about Python. You see, Object Oriented Programming was invented to reduce maintenance costs for completed projects, because that's where 90% of your expenses with the project will be. Ruby, at least, and apparently Python as well according to my friend's complaints, were invented to make the cheap part of the development process "easier", while at the same time letting the language fanboys pat themselves on the back about what clever programmers they are. This is exactly the opposite of software "engineering".
Well you can write terrible code in any language; C/C++ projectsare nodifferent. The "engineering" part is between the keyboard and the chair; a fool with a tool is still a fool. That's why testing matters and, with modern automated testing, full test coverage is not difficult.
Python is a well structured, expressive, language that is suitable for many types of application. You don't even have to write OOP code if you don't want to; though if you do, Python has good OOP support. OOP is not a magic fix for maintenance costs. Well structured code (OOP or not) is what makes maintenance easy.
produce that the current generation needs protection from that which makes us stronger and better adjusted?
If it weren't for being harassed, made fun of, and being generally dragged through the mud I'm not sure I would have ever toughened up and become so well adjusted. It's like they want to make sure the next generation is even worse crop of spineless jellyfish than the current.
Well as somebody who has been on Usenet since before "Eternal September", this is no different Usenet kill-files. In any forum you get people who contribute to the debate in a civil and constructive manner (though you may not agree with them). And then you get people who are neither constructive nor civil, who just shout their own narrow opinions and shower gratuitous abuse on anybody who disagrees with them.
Kill-files are a very effective way screening out the jerks while still seeing posts from people who have something useful to say.
constitutes hacking, gross misdemeanor under a 20+ year old law, 90 days and $2000 per instance if I remember correctly.
It's illegal in lots of places. Where I live modifying, or interfering with the operation of, somebody's computer without their consent is a crime. So as the saying goes "good luck with that".
Really> What percentage of those people receiving benefits are cheats? Go on, provide the statistics.
Here's a couple. By the UK government's own figures 0.7% of the entire welfare budget is accounted for by fraud. That's less even than the amount due to clerical errors by the Department of Work and Pensions, which comes to 0.9% of the total budget.
Better yet, there is good evidence that the welfare system is effectively subsidising large companies, like Tesco and fashion chain Next, who are paying employees on or below the poverty line and letting the welfare system pick up the pieces. Of course you will never see wealthy companies (or their wealthy executives and shareholders) called "benefit cheats"; they are merely "optimising their cash flow".
Being in the same categories is not enough to claim the trade mark or forbid anyone else to use the name.
The library in this case e.g. does not even "appear on the market" in contrast to the company KiK or their product.
The whole point of the classification system is to constrain the applicability of trademarks to similar sets of goods or services. So being in the same classification _is_ grounds for trademark infringement. And, as others have pointed out, trademark holders are obliged to defend their trademarks; it's a "use it or lose it" proposition.
And the trademark for "KiK" an instant messenger "App" on phones or tablets, does not cover a "library" or even a "program" written for software development.
At least not in my country, and likely not in yours either.
I'm guessing you are not a lawyer. The international law on trademarks classifies goods and services into trademark categories. This classification puts "data processing equipment, computers; computer software" in the same group (along with bunch of other things). So an "App", a "program" and a "library" are all just "computer software" for trademark purposes.
But if you wanted to start a company called "KiK" to sell "Apparatus for lighting, heating, steam generating, cooking, refrigerating, drying, ventilating, water supply and sanitary purposes" (for example) you're good to go.
I don't think this proves libraries per-se are bad, but blindly depending on out-of-house software repositories for every build or (worse) every startup/deploy is crazy.
We're a Java house (go ahead, get your ki[c]ks in...), and we use around 100 open source libraries. They're all mirrored locally in an Ivy repository we maintain. No new versions get checked in unless they've passed a reasonable level of scrutiny, and nothing gets deleted unless we delete it.
You beat me to it! I work in a Java/Maven house and we use Nexus to maintain an internal mirror of the open source libraries we use from Maven Central. The developers pull their build dependencies from the internal mirror not the Internet. In addition, we also mirror the source code for the libraries we use as we submit patches and enhancements for them.
Sometimes I think the reason that we blame ourselves for bad things happening, even when we have no power to foresee or stop them, even we've done everything that was good and right to keep those things from happening, even when we had nothing to do with the cause of those events... is because it's easier to believe that we could have done something and didn't, than to accept that we couldn't do anything.
I think it has a lot to do with there being two kinds of people in the world; those who feel genuine responsibility for what they do and those who don't. Unfortunately knowledgeable "doers" tend to be in the first group, and management tend to be in the second group. Having a functioning conscience is an impediment to climbing the corporate ladder.
If you're over 30, you're far more likely to be replaced in the next 5-10 years by some wet-behind-the-ears punk
*snip*
And, to get to my point: it is very often the older, more mature developers and sysadmins that have the deeper understanding you need when things are not as straightforward as managers feel they ought to be. Some companies are beginning to realise that.
Agreed. I've been developing software for almost 30 years and I'm not worried about being out of work. Experience counts. These days I typically lead agile dev teams and, while I do cut my share of the code, a lot of my role is driving the overall solution design in the right direction. A lot of the 20-somethings I see are competent coders but they are not good at visualising the overall system and thinking about things like resilience, high performance, latency, etc.
Of course, as others have noted, having a passion for your craft helps too. I continue to learn new languages, new techniques, and new tools. If you're good enough, you're never too old.
But what if I think it is a useful thing? The government has terminated my right based on a hypothetical. Better yet, an unelected bureaucrat has done so.
If you *personally* choose to wear a Fitbit (or similar device), you can give the data to whoever you want. There is nothing stopping you. So your rights are unaffected.
As the GP said, this is about preventing companies from coercing employees into intrusive monitoring; especially outside working hours. And BTW, in Europe the national Privacy (or Data Protection) Authorities are established by (and accountable to) the elected governments to enforce the privacy legislation enacted by the government.
Take a similar scenario. Some car insurance companies offer drivers a discount if they agree to have a device fitted to their car which records everywhere they go, when they go, and how they are driving. Drivers are free to voluntarily accept such a device if they choose. But the companies cannot penalise drivers like me who prefer to forego the discount rather than submit to such intrusive monitoring.
... may mean that EPUB continues to be seen as a 'baked' format.
The original quote was...
Because of this, the general perception of the EPUB-formatted e-book is that of a ‘baked and finished’ product, to be consumed rather than amended.
Which is a good perception in that it generally is. A better fit for novels and leisurely reading on a dedicated device. A lesser fit for anything technical or presentational. Every format has its niche.
EPUB is generally speaking my preferred e-book format. PDFs don't play well on smaller tablets, e-readers and smart phones. Being able to change the font size (and on some readers the typeface) and reflow the text is a big win. Though it's true that those devices are not ideal for technical texts with lots of diagrams.
Plus it is a open format. EPUBs are just zip files containing markup, css and image files.
People who abuse free samples are equivalent to thieves, people who test drive cars excessively are car jackers, and those taking more pennies than they leave are bank robbers!
Sadly portraying ad-blocking as piracy is becoming "a thing". I posted earlier this year about an anti-ad-blocking company - Clarity Ray - and their CEO who was comparing ad-blocking today to good old-fashioned "music piracy".
Funny how the original developers of Java didn't need a bloated Java IDE to develop it... or is Java "small-scale"?
As for the rest, to each their own. I never said that my way was the best way for everyone, so go dunk your head in a bucket of water and cool off a bit.
A file-based version control system should allow you to rebuild any or all versions in one shot. Makes it easy to keep everything backed up on other media without installing and configuring other software, and sharing with others. KISS beats complex any day. Having policies of who can modify what is also important - "you touch this, I KILL YOU" - so that takes care of teams. Being able to build, or branch off, any specific version at any time takes care of the rest.
"Modern professions software development" "using industry-standard best practices" has failed in too many ways to even begin to count. Or haven't you noticed that, instead of shipping completed products on floppies or cds, they now "ship and patch and patch and patch and patch and patch and..." because of the mindset of "we can patch it later so who gives a crap." The so-called "gold masters" are a lie.
I'm tempted to mod this as "Funny". It's certainly the most hilarious thing I've read today.
FWIW I haven't shipped software on physical media in years. That's what "continuous deployment" means; a continuous rolling cycle of automated build, test, and live deployment - sometimes daily. And the "test" part matters, because most paying customers do "give a crap" about the software working correctly.
As for the rest of it, it just confirms what I said in my last post.
Good luck in your programming career. You're going to need it.
I was pointing out the FACT that it's easy to do Java development without a bloated hand-holding IDE.
...the FACT that it's easy to do small-scale Java development without an IDE
FTFY
You keep using the terms "bloated" and "hand-holding" without providing any evidence; just your own personal opinion.
Judging from your own choice of tooling ("gedit, gmake, and bash, with a few perl scripts to take care of versioning") you've never worked on a significant development project, or in a serious development team.
gmake for build? Really? Never heard of Maven, or Gradle, or other modern build tools? They not only build your code but they also do things like run your unit and system test suites too (you do use automated testing, right?). And you don't have to hand hack make files. And they can even be run directly from the command line.
"bash, and a few perl scripts to take care of versioning"? Really? Never heard of git, mercurial, or even subversion. Or is using an actual version control system too "bloated and hand-holding" for you?
And how do you think your DIY approach will work in continuous build and continuous deployment environments? Or with a team of 20+ developers. Or when half the team is in a different city, or a different country?
You are fully entitled to your own opinion. But making out that everyone who doesn't agree with your approach is some kind of feeble-minded loser just displays a profound ignorance of modern professional software development.
gedit, gmake, and bash, with a few perl scripts to take care of versioning. That's not an ide. And no, I don't use macros or syntax highlighting.
Ah the memories of the 1990s, and flame wars in comp.lang.perl over whether syntax highlighting editors were evil or not. Who knew it would come around again?
Your whole argument is an example of Anecdotal Fallacy; "using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence". Your setup presumably suits your personal purposes, but asserting that everybody who doesn't do it your way is stupid, wrong and unprofessional is fundamentally flawed. And makes you look foolish. Good developers use the appropriate tools for the job.
Funnily enough, I typed that reply with Pale Moon. I've been trying it out for the last two weeks and am fairly impressed with it. Still, I'll probably go back to using Firefox as my main browser, but Vivaldi and Pale Moon are there if I do choose to move away.
I'm finding the direction that Firefox is taking is trying my patience, and as a long time user of Firefox since its Phoenix days, there might come a day when I say bye. Vivaldi and Pale Moon might well make that bye easier.
I've been using Pale Moon for a while now. I've used Firefox since the Firebird days but for me (and many others) Mozilla's decision to deprecate XUL-based extensions in favour of the WebExtensions API so that Firefox can be compatible with Chrome and Opera is the last straw. The WebExtensions API is much more restrictive and many popular extensions will be unworkable as a result.
There has been a a lot of negative reaction in the Mozilla forums; e.g "it's the extensions that make Firefox" and "If I wanted Chrome I'd use Chrome". But the Mozilla developers don't seem to be listening anymore.
I've found Pale Moon very good so far. Stable 64-bit builds, pre-Australis UI, all my favourite extensions work fine, sane and responsive developer community; what's not to like? Pale Moon will be a my browser of choice for the foreseeable future.
We have pushed many of our industries overseas again and again with heavy government regulations. While OSHA, workers comp, EPA, etc. minimum wage, etc. laws and regulations may have some sense, we have to realize that these same laws also reduce employment and push industries overseas and make many of our overseas competitors more competitive. If we could create a 100% safe society through passing safety and employment laws we may have to satisfy ourselves with 100% unemployment as well.
Well these days "more competitive" is a just synonym for "cheaper", which in turn means "higher shareholder value". Workers in Europe and North America have to deal with the cost of living in Europe and North America. It's not possible to live here on the typical salaries paid in places like India and China. So it was never an option for workers the 1st world to be cost competitive.
As for the safety issues, companies moving manufacturing offshore to places where working conditions are appalling is simply immoral. Things like this and this which, quite rightly, would never be tolerated in the 1st world are just shrugged off when they happen in places like Bangladesh. People there are apparently just an expendable resource in the pursuit of corporate profits.
Slashdot Mirror
What this law is designed to do (and needs to be done in Vancouver BC, Seattle WA, Portland Oregon, and San Francisco California) is stop people from hoarding property from the people who live in the city and need that property.
The obvious solution to a shortage of housing is to BUILD MORE HOUSING. Last year, SF rejected 95% of all building permit requests, and most people don't even bother to submit a request. Despite soaring demand, the number of new housing units is near zero. So the result is high prices. Duh. NYC and other cities are not much better. The problem is driven by NIMBY and BANANA voters. It is absurd to blame this on Airbnb.
You're missing the point. The issue is _not_ a genuine shortage of residential housing. The issue is speculators gobbling up residential properties and turning them into permanent short-term rentals via Airbnb and similar web sites. This artificially reduces the stock of available residential property for people who actually live and work in the city and need a full-time home; and it drives up the prices/rental of the properties that remain.
This kind of legislation is becoming increasingly common here in Europe too. It's still perfectly legal to rent out your spare bedroom via Airbnb; but not an entire property that you don't actually live in yourself. And most people are fine with that. The only people complaining are the ones who were trying to create short-term rental empires.
There are plenty of other options for tourists and business travelers who just need somewhere to sleep and shower for a week or two. It's about prioritising people who live, work and pay their taxes locally, over folks just passing through and property speculators. And rightly so. Even Airbnb says it's about people "sharing their own homes", not running a full-time rental business.
I mean, the video is already on your computer. If they shut down internet service, it'll move client-side. Hell, if I wanted I could output the video/audio of my screen and record them.
It's futile. They know it and we know it. But I guess the shareholders or the lawyer are just not happy if Google doesn't do anything about it. So they do this.
IANAL but I suggest that they are doing this to protect themselves from litigation. There's nothing to stop _you_ saving the stream of bits coming direct from youtube to _your_ computer onto _your_ hard drive. But a third party publicly offering a service whereby they retrieve the bits on your behalf, parcel them up, and then make them available to you is a different legal situation altogether.
Terminals/shells that support bracketed paste mode don't have this problem.
When you paste something, it won't execute until you press enter. This helps avoid issues with mistake pastes, and also issues wherein one accidentally copies a newline with the desired text (in this case, you can hit backspace to delete the newline, continue editing the command, and hit enter only when you're done).
There's a ZSH plugin that adds this functionality:
https://cirw.in/blog/bracketed-paste
I love zsh.
On Windows, if you use ConEmu to manage your shell sessions it will block execution of pastes that contain a Return character (regardless of which shell you are running; works with both cmd.exe and bash) and will warn you about the embedded Return.
Britain has a problem with the building trade, in particular the self-employed small business building trade. It's why there are TV shows like Cowboy Builders, and bad building work is commonly on other programmes like Watchdog and so on.
There's a real problem in the British building trade. There was a TV documentary a few years ago about Brits working across the EU. A couple of the guys interviewed were a plasterer and an electrician.
They were earning good money and had a good lifestyle, so the interviewer asked them what they would say to builders back home who might be thinking about doing the same thing. The guys said "If you don't have your City & Guilds certifications, don't bother coming. You can get hired on building sites in the UK with no qualifications, but over here that simply won't happen".
After 20 years in the business, I spend MUCH more time thinking about the problem and the best solutions than I do actually coding. If you're spending most of your time coding, that's probably mostly code I'll delete in a couple of years whwn I do it in a simpler, more elegant way.
This is exactly right. Today you can do more with fewer lines of code than ever before. The real value is in the thought process around *which* lines of code to write.
I've coded in node.js for a couple of years now, written some semi-big pieces of software to do real-time message passing/transaction processing stuff. It was fine. It's better than PHP, which I moved from. It's better than writing cgi-bin programs in C++, which is how I started. On of the big reasons to use node.js is it nicely integrates alternative protocols like WebSockets, RTC, AMPQ, so you can roll up a "web server plus other protocol" system that gets a lot of jobs done you just can't accomplish with PHP/Apache.
Well that's not really a big selling point. In the last couple of years I've worked on Java and Python projects that used WebSockets, RTC, AMQP, NoSQL databases, etc. Not only are these protocols well supported but in both cases you get a much richer and more robust platform to work on.
People love to hate on Javascript because they don't like admitting the language wars are over, and Javascript won. When you can walk into a room and ask "How many people have a compiler on them _right now_." and people answer "I've got at least two!" Try that with any other language. Compilers shipped, lines written, active users... JS wins on all metrics. It's not the "best" language, but then, what is?
And this is frankly misleading. Yes there's lots of Javascript code around, bit it's primarily on the client side. One of the biggest issues I've seen with node.js is the number of people who have only ever coded Javascript UIs, but who think that with node.js they can put "Server-side developer" on their CVs. It doesn't work that way. Backend development is an entirely different proposition.
I have hired over-40 programmers who were rockstars, and some over-40 workers who just could not deliver.
Age is just one variable among many, but people obsess over it because it is easier to ballpark someone's age in an interview than it is to get a read on other indicators of talent.
The biggest problem is that over-40 workers are universally more expensive than the 20's workers. They all want to jump in at the senior level, and feel justified in this based on their experience. This makes them a bigger risk to take, and ultimately more expensive if they don't pan out.
On the other hand, too much investment in kids results in software that works upfront but absolutely does not scale, and winds up full of ticking time bombs.
I think the money thing is a big issue alright. Apart from the knowledge and experience they bring, the over-40s have mortgages to pay and kids to put through college so working for entry level salaries is not an option. Like with offshoring, many employers assume that 3 cheap (but inexperienced) developers for the price of one expensive (but experienced) developer is a good deal. It isn't; it's a false economy.
A couple other things I've seen. Employers who assume that the brain ossifies at 40 and that "old dogs" are incapable of learning new tricks. We aren't. I'm continually learning new skills. And then there are folks who are concerned about managing developers who are older and more experienced than they are. A bit of honesty and respect goes a long way; we've seen most "management du jour" fads and we know that most of them are BS.
If you treat us greybeards right we can be surprisingly good value for money. :-)
I was just talking to an old Co-Worker from a C++ company I worked at a few years back. He asked "So what are you doing lately" and I told him I'm working on my thesis, which is titled "Ruby's a Terrible Programming Language, And You're A Terrible Programmer For Liking It". Then I cited a number of my complaints -- being able to add arbitrary functions to a live object, never knowing where to look for the interface definition of parameter objects, need to extensively test all execution paths of production code (Which no one ever does,) odd syntactic quirks and changes in syntax between language versions. He laughed and said he had exactly the same complaints about Python. You see, Object Oriented Programming was invented to reduce maintenance costs for completed projects, because that's where 90% of your expenses with the project will be. Ruby, at least, and apparently Python as well according to my friend's complaints, were invented to make the cheap part of the development process "easier", while at the same time letting the language fanboys pat themselves on the back about what clever programmers they are. This is exactly the opposite of software "engineering".
Well you can write terrible code in any language; C/C++ projects are no different. The "engineering" part is between the keyboard and the chair; a fool with a tool is still a fool. That's why testing matters and, with modern automated testing, full test coverage is not difficult.
Python is a well structured, expressive, language that is suitable for many types of application. You don't even have to write OOP code if you don't want to; though if you do, Python has good OOP support. OOP is not a magic fix for maintenance costs. Well structured code (OOP or not) is what makes maintenance easy.
produce that the current generation needs protection from that which makes us stronger and better adjusted?
If it weren't for being harassed, made fun of, and being generally dragged through the mud I'm not sure I would have ever toughened up and become so well adjusted. It's like they want to make sure the next generation is even worse crop of spineless jellyfish than the current.
Well as somebody who has been on Usenet since before "Eternal September", this is no different Usenet kill-files. In any forum you get people who contribute to the debate in a civil and constructive manner (though you may not agree with them). And then you get people who are neither constructive nor civil, who just shout their own narrow opinions and shower gratuitous abuse on anybody who disagrees with them.
Kill-files are a very effective way screening out the jerks while still seeing posts from people who have something useful to say.
constitutes hacking, gross misdemeanor under a 20+ year old law, 90 days and $2000 per instance if I remember correctly.
It's illegal in lots of places. Where I live modifying, or interfering with the operation of, somebody's computer without their consent is a crime. So as the saying goes "good luck with that".
Really> What percentage of those people receiving benefits are cheats? Go on, provide the statistics.
Here's a couple. By the UK government's own figures 0.7% of the entire welfare budget is accounted for by fraud. That's less even than the amount due to clerical errors by the Department of Work and Pensions, which comes to 0.9% of the total budget.
Better yet, there is good evidence that the welfare system is effectively subsidising large companies, like Tesco and fashion chain Next, who are paying employees on or below the poverty line and letting the welfare system pick up the pieces. Of course you will never see wealthy companies (or their wealthy executives and shareholders) called "benefit cheats"; they are merely "optimising their cash flow".
Being in the same categories is not enough to claim the trade mark or forbid anyone else to use the name.
The library in this case e.g. does not even "appear on the market" in contrast to the company KiK or their product.
The whole point of the classification system is to constrain the applicability of trademarks to similar sets of goods or services. So being in the same classification _is_ grounds for trademark infringement. And, as others have pointed out, trademark holders are obliged to defend their trademarks; it's a "use it or lose it" proposition.
And the trademark for "KiK" an instant messenger "App" on phones or tablets, does not cover a "library" or even a "program" written for software development.
At least not in my country, and likely not in yours either.
I'm guessing you are not a lawyer. The international law on trademarks classifies goods and services into trademark categories. This classification puts "data processing equipment, computers; computer software" in the same group (along with bunch of other things). So an "App", a "program" and a "library" are all just "computer software" for trademark purposes.
But if you wanted to start a company called "KiK" to sell "Apparatus for lighting, heating, steam generating, cooking, refrigerating, drying, ventilating, water supply and sanitary purposes" (for example) you're good to go.
I don't think this proves libraries per-se are bad, but blindly depending on out-of-house software repositories for every build or (worse) every startup/deploy is crazy.
We're a Java house (go ahead, get your ki[c]ks in...), and we use around 100 open source libraries. They're all mirrored locally in an Ivy repository we maintain. No new versions get checked in unless they've passed a reasonable level of scrutiny, and nothing gets deleted unless we delete it.
You beat me to it! I work in a Java/Maven house and we use Nexus to maintain an internal mirror of the open source libraries we use from Maven Central. The developers pull their build dependencies from the internal mirror not the Internet. In addition, we also mirror the source code for the libraries we use as we submit patches and enhancements for them.
Sometimes I think the reason that we blame ourselves for bad things happening, even when we have no power to foresee or stop them, even we've done everything that was good and right to keep those things from happening, even when we had nothing to do with the cause of those events... is because it's easier to believe that we could have done something and didn't, than to accept that we couldn't do anything.
I think it has a lot to do with there being two kinds of people in the world; those who feel genuine responsibility for what they do and those who don't. Unfortunately knowledgeable "doers" tend to be in the first group, and management tend to be in the second group. Having a functioning conscience is an impediment to climbing the corporate ladder.
If you're over 30, you're far more likely to be replaced in the next 5-10 years by some wet-behind-the-ears punk
*snip*
And, to get to my point: it is very often the older, more mature developers and sysadmins that have the deeper understanding you need when things are not as straightforward as managers feel they ought to be. Some companies are beginning to realise that.
Agreed. I've been developing software for almost 30 years and I'm not worried about being out of work. Experience counts. These days I typically lead agile dev teams and, while I do cut my share of the code, a lot of my role is driving the overall solution design in the right direction. A lot of the 20-somethings I see are competent coders but they are not good at visualising the overall system and thinking about things like resilience, high performance, latency, etc.
Of course, as others have noted, having a passion for your craft helps too. I continue to learn new languages, new techniques, and new tools. If you're good enough, you're never too old.
> balance of power
But what if I think it is a useful thing? The government has terminated my right based on a hypothetical. Better yet, an unelected bureaucrat has done so.
If you *personally* choose to wear a Fitbit (or similar device), you can give the data to whoever you want. There is nothing stopping you. So your rights are unaffected.
As the GP said, this is about preventing companies from coercing employees into intrusive monitoring; especially outside working hours. And BTW, in Europe the national Privacy (or Data Protection) Authorities are established by (and accountable to) the elected governments to enforce the privacy legislation enacted by the government.
Take a similar scenario. Some car insurance companies offer drivers a discount if they agree to have a device fitted to their car which records everywhere they go, when they go, and how they are driving. Drivers are free to voluntarily accept such a device if they choose. But the companies cannot penalise drivers like me who prefer to forego the discount rather than submit to such intrusive monitoring.
... may mean that EPUB continues to be seen as a 'baked' format.
The original quote was ...
Because of this, the general perception of the EPUB-formatted e-book is that of a ‘baked and finished’ product, to be consumed rather than amended.
Which is a good perception in that it generally is. A better fit for novels and leisurely reading on a dedicated device. A lesser fit for anything technical or presentational. Every format has its niche.
EPUB is generally speaking my preferred e-book format. PDFs don't play well on smaller tablets, e-readers and smart phones. Being able to change the font size (and on some readers the typeface) and reflow the text is a big win. Though it's true that those devices are not ideal for technical texts with lots of diagrams.
Plus it is a open format. EPUBs are just zip files containing markup, css and image files.
I'm here all week :-)
People who abuse free samples are equivalent to thieves, people who test drive cars excessively are car jackers, and those taking more pennies than they leave are bank robbers!
Sadly portraying ad-blocking as piracy is becoming "a thing". I posted earlier this year about an anti-ad-blocking company - Clarity Ray - and their CEO who was comparing ad-blocking today to good old-fashioned "music piracy".
Funny how the original developers of Java didn't need a bloated Java IDE to develop it ... or is Java "small-scale"?
As for the rest, to each their own. I never said that my way was the best way for everyone, so go dunk your head in a bucket of water and cool off a bit.
A file-based version control system should allow you to rebuild any or all versions in one shot. Makes it easy to keep everything backed up on other media without installing and configuring other software, and sharing with others. KISS beats complex any day. Having policies of who can modify what is also important - "you touch this, I KILL YOU" - so that takes care of teams. Being able to build, or branch off, any specific version at any time takes care of the rest.
"Modern professions software development" "using industry-standard best practices" has failed in too many ways to even begin to count. Or haven't you noticed that, instead of shipping completed products on floppies or cds, they now "ship and patch and patch and patch and patch and patch and ..." because of the mindset of "we can patch it later so who gives a crap." The so-called "gold masters" are a lie.
I'm tempted to mod this as "Funny". It's certainly the most hilarious thing I've read today.
FWIW I haven't shipped software on physical media in years. That's what "continuous deployment" means; a continuous rolling cycle of automated build, test, and live deployment - sometimes daily. And the "test" part matters, because most paying customers do "give a crap" about the software working correctly.
As for the rest of it, it just confirms what I said in my last post.
Good luck in your programming career. You're going to need it.
I was pointing out the FACT that it's easy to do Java development without a bloated hand-holding IDE.
...the FACT that it's easy to do small-scale Java development without an IDE
FTFY
You keep using the terms "bloated" and "hand-holding" without providing any evidence; just your own personal opinion.
Judging from your own choice of tooling ("gedit, gmake, and bash, with a few perl scripts to take care of versioning") you've never worked on a significant development project, or in a serious development team.
gmake for build? Really? Never heard of Maven, or Gradle, or other modern build tools? They not only build your code but they also do things like run your unit and system test suites too (you do use automated testing, right?). And you don't have to hand hack make files. And they can even be run directly from the command line.
"bash, and a few perl scripts to take care of versioning"? Really? Never heard of git, mercurial, or even subversion. Or is using an actual version control system too "bloated and hand-holding" for you?
And how do you think your DIY approach will work in continuous build and continuous deployment environments? Or with a team of 20+ developers. Or when half the team is in a different city, or a different country?
You are fully entitled to your own opinion. But making out that everyone who doesn't agree with your approach is some kind of feeble-minded loser just displays a profound ignorance of modern professional software development.
gedit, gmake, and bash, with a few perl scripts to take care of versioning. That's not an ide. And no, I don't use macros or syntax highlighting.
Ah the memories of the 1990s, and flame wars in comp.lang.perl over whether syntax highlighting editors were evil or not. Who knew it would come around again?
Your whole argument is an example of Anecdotal Fallacy; "using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of sound reasoning or compelling evidence". Your setup presumably suits your personal purposes, but asserting that everybody who doesn't do it your way is stupid, wrong and unprofessional is fundamentally flawed. And makes you look foolish. Good developers use the appropriate tools for the job.
Funnily enough, I typed that reply with Pale Moon. I've been trying it out for the last two weeks and am fairly impressed with it. Still, I'll probably go back to using Firefox as my main browser, but Vivaldi and Pale Moon are there if I do choose to move away.
I'm finding the direction that Firefox is taking is trying my patience, and as a long time user of Firefox since its Phoenix days, there might come a day when I say bye. Vivaldi and Pale Moon might well make that bye easier.
I've been using Pale Moon for a while now. I've used Firefox since the Firebird days but for me (and many others) Mozilla's decision to deprecate XUL-based extensions in favour of the WebExtensions API so that Firefox can be compatible with Chrome and Opera is the last straw. The WebExtensions API is much more restrictive and many popular extensions will be unworkable as a result.
There has been a a lot of negative reaction in the Mozilla forums; e.g "it's the extensions that make Firefox" and "If I wanted Chrome I'd use Chrome". But the Mozilla developers don't seem to be listening anymore.
I've found Pale Moon very good so far. Stable 64-bit builds, pre-Australis UI, all my favourite extensions work fine, sane and responsive developer community; what's not to like? Pale Moon will be a my browser of choice for the foreseeable future.
We have pushed many of our industries overseas again and again with heavy government regulations. While OSHA, workers comp, EPA, etc. minimum wage, etc. laws and regulations may have some sense, we have to realize that these same laws also reduce employment and push industries overseas and make many of our overseas competitors more competitive. If we could create a 100% safe society through passing safety and employment laws we may have to satisfy ourselves with 100% unemployment as well.
Well these days "more competitive" is a just synonym for "cheaper", which in turn means "higher shareholder value". Workers in Europe and North America have to deal with the cost of living in Europe and North America. It's not possible to live here on the typical salaries paid in places like India and China. So it was never an option for workers the 1st world to be cost competitive.
As for the safety issues, companies moving manufacturing offshore to places where working conditions are appalling is simply immoral. Things like this and this which, quite rightly, would never be tolerated in the 1st world are just shrugged off when they happen in places like Bangladesh. People there are apparently just an expendable resource in the pursuit of corporate profits.