However, were previous administrations *more* transparent? No, not really. Administrations have been secretive forever. The only thing new with the Obama administration was the campaign promise to be more open, which then draws peoples attention to the fact that there is no transparency. And given the public's inability to remember the past they assume that only the Obama administration is being opaque. Of course there's some partisanship playing a part - the president you like is forgiven, the president you hate is blamed ("it's ok for my guys, we were fighting terrorism, Hitler, the cold war, the kaiser, Santa Ana, the confederates, and Canadians spies, so being secretive is necessary for security").
Constitution does not have the co-equal branches concept written into it. It just has three branches. The supreme court started as something of a joke, and then later during Marbury v. Madison claimed constitutional jurisdiction for itself. But even then it had no possibility of enforcing any of its decisions without either congress or executive going along with them (ie, if it suited their politics). Andrew Jackson completely ignored the court decisions against him. The status of supreme court basically grew slowly over time; not all at once at the beginning, and not all at once with some reactionary court in the 60s.
I like an exchange of ideas. But this doesn't happen much on Slashdot anymore. I'm sick and tired of the alt-right leanings here; but then I figure I need to hear views from all over; only it turns out these arent viewpoints so much as name calling and trolls.
In other words, I came here looking for an argument and ended up in the abuse room by mistake (stupid git). I'm just too lazy to leave.
I'm a decline-to-state voter. I'm not a member of any organized or disorganized political party. And this stance is based upon growing up with very partisan friends, relations, neighbors, towns, universities. I do not care for watching competitive sports, I don't have any favorite sports teams, and that's the same feeling I have for politics - it's all a bit too sweaty and smelly for me to jump in and start waving pom poms around.
And who cares who a cartoonist endorses for president? It's really odd. Except that he's got a loyal following. The loyalists don't agree with him but they're following him. I don't care who my mother is voting for either but she tells me anyway.
I don't think Putin is trying to help Trump per se, only that he prefers political instability in the US. So a Trump win, or a Trump lawsuit when he doesn't win, or a too-close-to-call election, or four more years of cat-calling, are all Putin wins.
Safe place for what? People who talk like Trump were frowned upon forever, it's not something new. It may be ok in the frat house but to the rest of the university the frat houses are recognized as a bastion of boorish behavior. In the dorms if someone talked this way in the 80s, you'd nod and try dislodge yourself from the conversation. Men do have the ability to recognize when other men are scumbags.
However, voting for president is often the least important thing on the ballot. Your logic implies that if you're not in a swing state then voting is pointless, when it is still very vital.
Nixon wasn't so bad though. He did some good things. Pulled us out of Vietnam, opened diplomatic relationships with China, formed the EPA, etc. He was only evil when it came to campaigning. Or to put it another way, he was the first president to be caught doing this.
Except Gary Johnson. He tried to make this exact point that he could be speaking gibberish and still look good next to them, and proceeded to actually speak gibberish on camera.
And so suddenly Trump who uses full articulate words while babbling looks good in comparison. Not in policiy perhaps. But the hardest thing for a politician to learn I think is how to speak to people who are NOT your fan base and who do not agree with you. It's fine and good to be all Libertarian and use secret Libertarian code phrases at a Libertarian party convention, but to the average undecided voter (by which I mean "smart" voter) it sounds suspicious, odd, goofball, etc. Trump is never going to convince anyone who's not already a Trump supporter to vote for him, Hillary is never going to convince anyone who's not already a Hillary supporter to vote for her, and Gary Johnson is only going to manage to get undecided voters to vote for him by keeping quiet (unless asked about Aleppo in which case he should answer clearly).
The water cooler has the advantage of keeping mostly quiet, except for the occasional gurgle which can be excused due to the $100 a plate compaign donor luncheon.
I used to feel like a lot of software people with this innate inferiority complex about their job. Real engineers they think design things correctly, they follow rigid processes, design things correctly, do proper tests, releasing no product that is not ready, unlike the slap dash programmers. But it's not true. EE people are just as screwed up, they will make bad circuits and hand wave away problems because it's too expensive to redesign. Bridge builders have bridges that fall down, and none of them can accurately predict the true cost (just like any product manager, it's all about making the head boss happy rather than telling the truth).
Ultimately the problems come from management, usually upper management. They have a product that catches fire and they want the problem fixed as soon as humanly possible, and not an hour longer than that. They give a deadline on finding out the the cause of the fire, and when that deadline is up they go with the best guess from people who aren't the experts, because the experts give an answer they don't like. The real fix probably destroys the last of their wafer thin margins.
"Hey boss, I think I found a bug, but I'm not sure. Can we hire about 10 really expensive consultants to help get down to the root cause?" "Can't afford it. I know you're just a software guy, but read some docs and design a test plan for it. By thursday."
Depends on who did the software. A bunch of Java application people, who think battery management is just calling UseSafeBatteryMode(true), or programmers who read the data sheets and worked out the math?
They have a driving assist, they don't have a full auto-pilot. The drivers were naive in assuming they could fully relinquish control of their driving. Even self driving google cars have a QA person behind the wheel.
There's already a highly qualified candidate being put forward. I'd rather have that person than any one Trump likes. And a better candidate than anything the Bush administration put forward. People only say that this is vital and crucial because they're stuck on a tiny handful of issues that are fading away - anti-gay, anti-abortion, and they feel deep in their hearts that this is the last stand. The fiscal conservatives aren't this emotional, it's the social conservatives that are desperate here and siding with Trump despite having nothing in common with him (sure he gropes women but they're hoping he'll side with them when the time comes).
I've never had to use MISRA C. It's a very strange beast. It's not used in any medical device software I've had to use, which is a place where safe coding is necessary. Some rules are very good ideas. Some rules though just seem arbitrary, like one person's personal guidelines turned into requirements. Ie, no non-constant function pointers, that's a very common and very useful programming method. That rule basically says don't even bother trying to be object oriented. Restrictions on gotos have nothing whatsoever to do with safety.
But if you have to follow their guidelines because you've got a manager who belives in marketing, then you deal with it. Don't use the gotos. That does not mean the use of gotos by someone not following MISRA rules is wrong or misguided. If you've got a team coding standard that says no gotos and only single returns from functions, then you deal with that also.
"Goto considered harmful" was written in an era when structured programming was extremely rare. It in no way at all invalidated the use of goto. When you're using C, you don't have all the features that the millenial kids demand. And there is yet to be a good language that replaces C, so we're stuck using goto in some cases just to have more readable code than the alternative.
But the anti-goto is so entrenched now that some people refuse to even use "continue", "break", or even mutiple returns from a function (never mind that their own code doesn't yet work and is chock full of errors, they will quickly and loudly point out that you did an early return).
There's some good stuff in Linux. But damn it's an unreadable mess in so many places. I like looking at BSD based code because it is so often much more straight forward and easier to understand.
So where in the open source world are there regular code reviews with thought out discussions about how to write code better, how to follow the correct style guidelines, pointing out "oh by the way, you're using BUG_ON() the wrong way", and stuff like that?
Slashdot Mirror
However, were previous administrations *more* transparent? No, not really. Administrations have been secretive forever. The only thing new with the Obama administration was the campaign promise to be more open, which then draws peoples attention to the fact that there is no transparency. And given the public's inability to remember the past they assume that only the Obama administration is being opaque. Of course there's some partisanship playing a part - the president you like is forgiven, the president you hate is blamed ("it's ok for my guys, we were fighting terrorism, Hitler, the cold war, the kaiser, Santa Ana, the confederates, and Canadians spies, so being secretive is necessary for security").
An Anonymous Coward fight! Get the popcorn!
Personal attacks are how you distinguish real journalists from the wannabes like Anonymous Coward, bloggers, and cable news channels.
We've got stalkers?
Constitution does not have the co-equal branches concept written into it. It just has three branches. The supreme court started as something of a joke, and then later during Marbury v. Madison claimed constitutional jurisdiction for itself. But even then it had no possibility of enforcing any of its decisions without either congress or executive going along with them (ie, if it suited their politics). Andrew Jackson completely ignored the court decisions against him. The status of supreme court basically grew slowly over time; not all at once at the beginning, and not all at once with some reactionary court in the 60s.
I am proud to announce that I am endorsing Becky With The Good Hair for president!
That word you keep using, "presidential", I do not think it means what you think it does.
I like an exchange of ideas. But this doesn't happen much on Slashdot anymore. I'm sick and tired of the alt-right leanings here; but then I figure I need to hear views from all over; only it turns out these arent viewpoints so much as name calling and trolls.
In other words, I came here looking for an argument and ended up in the abuse room by mistake (stupid git). I'm just too lazy to leave.
I'm a decline-to-state voter. I'm not a member of any organized or disorganized political party. And this stance is based upon growing up with very partisan friends, relations, neighbors, towns, universities. I do not care for watching competitive sports, I don't have any favorite sports teams, and that's the same feeling I have for politics - it's all a bit too sweaty and smelly for me to jump in and start waving pom poms around.
And who cares who a cartoonist endorses for president? It's really odd. Except that he's got a loyal following. The loyalists don't agree with him but they're following him. I don't care who my mother is voting for either but she tells me anyway.
I don't think Putin is trying to help Trump per se, only that he prefers political instability in the US. So a Trump win, or a Trump lawsuit when he doesn't win, or a too-close-to-call election, or four more years of cat-calling, are all Putin wins.
Safe place for what? People who talk like Trump were frowned upon forever, it's not something new. It may be ok in the frat house but to the rest of the university the frat houses are recognized as a bastion of boorish behavior. In the dorms if someone talked this way in the 80s, you'd nod and try dislodge yourself from the conversation. Men do have the ability to recognize when other men are scumbags.
However, voting for president is often the least important thing on the ballot. Your logic implies that if you're not in a swing state then voting is pointless, when it is still very vital.
Nixon wasn't so bad though. He did some good things. Pulled us out of Vietnam, opened diplomatic relationships with China, formed the EPA, etc. He was only evil when it came to campaigning. Or to put it another way, he was the first president to be caught doing this.
Except Gary Johnson. He tried to make this exact point that he could be speaking gibberish and still look good next to them, and proceeded to actually speak gibberish on camera.
And so suddenly Trump who uses full articulate words while babbling looks good in comparison. Not in policiy perhaps. But the hardest thing for a politician to learn I think is how to speak to people who are NOT your fan base and who do not agree with you. It's fine and good to be all Libertarian and use secret Libertarian code phrases at a Libertarian party convention, but to the average undecided voter (by which I mean "smart" voter) it sounds suspicious, odd, goofball, etc. Trump is never going to convince anyone who's not already a Trump supporter to vote for him, Hillary is never going to convince anyone who's not already a Hillary supporter to vote for her, and Gary Johnson is only going to manage to get undecided voters to vote for him by keeping quiet (unless asked about Aleppo in which case he should answer clearly).
The water cooler has the advantage of keeping mostly quiet, except for the occasional gurgle which can be excused due to the $100 a plate compaign donor luncheon.
I used to feel like a lot of software people with this innate inferiority complex about their job. Real engineers they think design things correctly, they follow rigid processes, design things correctly, do proper tests, releasing no product that is not ready, unlike the slap dash programmers. But it's not true. EE people are just as screwed up, they will make bad circuits and hand wave away problems because it's too expensive to redesign. Bridge builders have bridges that fall down, and none of them can accurately predict the true cost (just like any product manager, it's all about making the head boss happy rather than telling the truth).
Ultimately the problems come from management, usually upper management. They have a product that catches fire and they want the problem fixed as soon as humanly possible, and not an hour longer than that. They give a deadline on finding out the the cause of the fire, and when that deadline is up they go with the best guess from people who aren't the experts, because the experts give an answer they don't like. The real fix probably destroys the last of their wafer thin margins.
"Hey boss, I think I found a bug, but I'm not sure. Can we hire about 10 really expensive consultants to help get down to the root cause?"
"Can't afford it. I know you're just a software guy, but read some docs and design a test plan for it. By thursday."
Depends on who did the software. A bunch of Java application people, who think battery management is just calling UseSafeBatteryMode(true), or programmers who read the data sheets and worked out the math?
They have a driving assist, they don't have a full auto-pilot. The drivers were naive in assuming they could fully relinquish control of their driving. Even self driving google cars have a QA person behind the wheel.
There's already a highly qualified candidate being put forward. I'd rather have that person than any one Trump likes. And a better candidate than anything the Bush administration put forward. People only say that this is vital and crucial because they're stuck on a tiny handful of issues that are fading away - anti-gay, anti-abortion, and they feel deep in their hearts that this is the last stand. The fiscal conservatives aren't this emotional, it's the social conservatives that are desperate here and siding with Trump despite having nothing in common with him (sure he gropes women but they're hoping he'll side with them when the time comes).
I've never had to use MISRA C. It's a very strange beast. It's not used in any medical device software I've had to use, which is a place where safe coding is necessary. Some rules are very good ideas. Some rules though just seem arbitrary, like one person's personal guidelines turned into requirements. Ie, no non-constant function pointers, that's a very common and very useful programming method. That rule basically says don't even bother trying to be object oriented. Restrictions on gotos have nothing whatsoever to do with safety.
But if you have to follow their guidelines because you've got a manager who belives in marketing, then you deal with it. Don't use the gotos. That does not mean the use of gotos by someone not following MISRA rules is wrong or misguided. If you've got a team coding standard that says no gotos and only single returns from functions, then you deal with that also.
"Goto considered harmful" was written in an era when structured programming was extremely rare. It in no way at all invalidated the use of goto. When you're using C, you don't have all the features that the millenial kids demand. And there is yet to be a good language that replaces C, so we're stuck using goto in some cases just to have more readable code than the alternative.
But the anti-goto is so entrenched now that some people refuse to even use "continue", "break", or even mutiple returns from a function (never mind that their own code doesn't yet work and is chock full of errors, they will quickly and loudly point out that you did an early return).
Oh, is it Unix compatible now?
The download takes awhile, which is the perfect time to go to the forums and declare your superiority.
There's some good stuff in Linux. But damn it's an unreadable mess in so many places. I like looking at BSD based code because it is so often much more straight forward and easier to understand.
So where in the open source world are there regular code reviews with thought out discussions about how to write code better, how to follow the correct style guidelines, pointing out "oh by the way, you're using BUG_ON() the wrong way", and stuff like that?