There is so much code, and yet none of it may be appropriate to cut and paste. Most code on the net is PC oriented; bulky, slow, using a scripting language or not portable. So if you're doing embedded systems all of it is irrelevant. If you're on a very tiny machine, almost all of the code has to be new and original because the prebuilt libraries are too big or do not do exactly what is necessary and it would take more code to wrap around them than to rewrite it all.
It is also difficult to know if you're standing on the shoulders of giants or midgets if you never look down.
But you have to FIX the wheel. I ask about linked lists in interviews, not because I think this is necessarily a vital skill, but because the job duties require fixing bugs in code that use linked lists and sometimes obscure bugs in the linked lists themselves (yes even in commercial libraries). Besides, why let someone build a wall if they are unable to recognize a brick when they see one?
Sure, google for the concepts is good. But how can you google for something you've never heard of or encountered before? There is a certain level of basic knowledge that is required first.
Because the code on the internet is often inadequate. It's written for a PC with an overabundance of memory and speed and so is inappropriate for embedded systems where saving even a few bytes can make a difference. Sure, I google the code, but I never copy it because it's very often the wrong solution.
Stackoverflow has gone downhill though. When it was new there were smart questions and smart answers from experts. Now there are basic questions and novices provide incorrect answers, and experts who have not laboriously earned enough reputation are not allowed to make corrections.
Their whole corporate existence was emblematic of the modern economy of making money from doing nothing. Buying and selling stuff that they did not own, sitting in the middle and sweeping up profits. They did this with electricity, they had major plans to do this with water (pump it into aquifers in wet years in California then sell it at a profit in dry years), there were rumors they thought about stuff like this with air. Before they were "caught" they were hailed as geniuses in the business world because to the amoral economic leaders in this country they were doing nothing wrong.
It's typical law enforcement mentality that makes him think anything goes as long as it can catch a bad guy. The idea that the ends justify the means. What Snowden did was reveal government misconduct, and judges are not a lot more strict and are pulling back on the anything-goes style. In other words, he feels they could have caught the terrorists if only they had been allowed to snoop on everyone. And by everyone this means everyone.
It is indeed true, The Donald can not keep his mouth shut. Laying the traps are too easy. A real politician would normally work on a set of policy ideas, vet them with a group of advisers, practice with some mock debates, etc. Trump doesn't prepare though it seems, he just blusters around. So someone asks about a Muslim database and he's genuinely responding with a stream of consciousness.
Maybe all the Oracle users should be registered with some sort of central agency. I'm not saying do it, I'm saying we should think about it. Because I'm really really rich. And I'd date my daughter if she wasn't my daughter.
That's scary in itself. But seeing the actual words from The Donald is hilarious. He's clearly has no plan, he's improvising on the fly, trying to project the image that he has a secret plan but he can't go into details yet. He sounds like that angry drunk guy you meet at a bar who wants to rant about things but has no real idea of what he's talking about.
Yup, let's get rid of all the White Christians in this countries. Not all of them are terrorists sure, but we have overwhelming evidence that they purposely were engaged in an ongoing campaign to kill the natives residents with guns and disease and import their barbaric eastern legal practices to replace the existing system of laws. Why should we trade our freedom away just so that these genocidal maniacs who hate us can go free?
Radio talk show covered this today. One guest kept claiming that you couldn't trust the encryption experts because they had a financial motivation from Silicon Valley companies. He kept hammering this point over and over despite how ridiculous it was. Encryption is being added by companies because the customers have demanded it.
On the other hand, he never pointed out that law enforcement have their on innate biases towards fewer freedoms. Law enforcement has a long history of pushing hard against privacy boundaries, believe in guilty at first suspicion, etc. If they could get their way, law enforcement would have cameras in everybody's homes for their safety. They have a financial motivation to raise their conviction rates. The problem is that we could always have another J Edgar Hoover clone take charge of the FBI at which point we will need a government able to push back and slap down their attempts at spying on everyone, or the ability for the public to protect themselves with encryption.
Fundamental problem the divide between people who feel it's better for a few guilty people to get away with their crimes as long as this protects innocent people, and others who believe that it's ok for a few innocent people are punished as long as no one guilty gets away with their crimes.
So we're making more rules here. That's the point I was making. Fantasy is not a system where anything goes, because there are rules being applied all the time. It's an annoying fight in the online game I play, Lord of the Rings Online, where some new player wishes for something ridiculous to happen ("the other game I played had floating castles!l") and then they defend it by saying "but it's just a fantasy, so anything can happen").
Not true. Most fantasy stories come with rules, unspoken or otherwise. Batman is the good guy. Bilbo can't do magic. Harry Potter needs a wand to cast spells. Glorfindel does not use a rocket launcher.
Because the flaws are so egregious that they've gone beyond merely funny and into face palming territory. Just because it's a movie doesn't mean you can just be stupid about it. Now if the entire premise is bizarre and the world setting is alien, then maybe stretching things is ok (otherwise Anime would fall on its face). But if the entire premise is that the world is just like our own except for a few military combat situations, then having a bridge floating in mid air is just plain dumb.
Believe me, even in something like X-Men, if Wolverine had picked up that Golden Gate bridge instead of Magneto, the fans would have come out of the wood work to say how stupid it was, how it broke all the lore, and what were the writers smoking. But when a bridge is cut in half and manages to defy gravity by not falling down we're supposed to just look the other way instead of noticing that the writers are stupid?
Even the massive cables on the Golden Gate bridge aren't strong enough for that kind is suspension of disbelief.
You know, I Iook stupid now. I was reading the article about bridge collapses and ended up back on the wrong web browser tab thinking you were talking about how laughing at hollywood was insensitive. Doh! Where's that Slashdot delete button?
Nothing in the article in question is disparaging to anyone except Hollywood writers. So how you are you being alienated? So dumb people versus people of average intelligence is now a "we vs they" issue, and must we give elementary school dropouts equal time? Seems silly since these dumb people are the ones getting all the air time in the cinemas anyway.
So he's a snob for pointing out massive errors performed by snobbish Hollywood writers who are too important to open up a "physics for dumbasses" book?
Hollywood these days is full of the most ridiculous plot elements, stupid science, illogical economics, implausible motivations, and it's gone way beyond the point where you can just ignore it all because of suspension of disbelief. Even the Walking Dead is more believable than your typical AAA movie release.
I use Google+, but I don't use any other Google applications (other than Android). No gmail, no gphoto/picasa/whatever, no hangouts, no youtube (I stay logged out so it can't track me, I don't read/write comments there).
Slashdot Mirror
There is so much code, and yet none of it may be appropriate to cut and paste. Most code on the net is PC oriented; bulky, slow, using a scripting language or not portable. So if you're doing embedded systems all of it is irrelevant. If you're on a very tiny machine, almost all of the code has to be new and original because the prebuilt libraries are too big or do not do exactly what is necessary and it would take more code to wrap around them than to rewrite it all.
It is also difficult to know if you're standing on the shoulders of giants or midgets if you never look down.
But you have to FIX the wheel. I ask about linked lists in interviews, not because I think this is necessarily a vital skill, but because the job duties require fixing bugs in code that use linked lists and sometimes obscure bugs in the linked lists themselves (yes even in commercial libraries). Besides, why let someone build a wall if they are unable to recognize a brick when they see one?
Sure, google for the concepts is good. But how can you google for something you've never heard of or encountered before? There is a certain level of basic knowledge that is required first.
Because the code on the internet is often inadequate. It's written for a PC with an overabundance of memory and speed and so is inappropriate for embedded systems where saving even a few bytes can make a difference. Sure, I google the code, but I never copy it because it's very often the wrong solution.
Stackoverflow has gone downhill though. When it was new there were smart questions and smart answers from experts. Now there are basic questions and novices provide incorrect answers, and experts who have not laboriously earned enough reputation are not allowed to make corrections.
Their whole corporate existence was emblematic of the modern economy of making money from doing nothing. Buying and selling stuff that they did not own, sitting in the middle and sweeping up profits. They did this with electricity, they had major plans to do this with water (pump it into aquifers in wet years in California then sell it at a profit in dry years), there were rumors they thought about stuff like this with air. Before they were "caught" they were hailed as geniuses in the business world because to the amoral economic leaders in this country they were doing nothing wrong.
It seems CIOs spend 10% of their time actually working, the rest of the time they're shmoozing with all the other entitled execs.
Every artist needs an editor. Just like every genius needs someone whispering "stop being a dumbass".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It's typical law enforcement mentality that makes him think anything goes as long as it can catch a bad guy. The idea that the ends justify the means. What Snowden did was reveal government misconduct, and judges are not a lot more strict and are pulling back on the anything-goes style. In other words, he feels they could have caught the terrorists if only they had been allowed to snoop on everyone. And by everyone this means everyone.
It is indeed true, The Donald can not keep his mouth shut. Laying the traps are too easy. A real politician would normally work on a set of policy ideas, vet them with a group of advisers, practice with some mock debates, etc. Trump doesn't prepare though it seems, he just blusters around. So someone asks about a Muslim database and he's genuinely responding with a stream of consciousness.
Maybe all the Oracle users should be registered with some sort of central agency. I'm not saying do it, I'm saying we should think about it. Because I'm really really rich. And I'd date my daughter if she wasn't my daughter.
That's scary in itself. But seeing the actual words from The Donald is hilarious. He's clearly has no plan, he's improvising on the fly, trying to project the image that he has a secret plan but he can't go into details yet. He sounds like that angry drunk guy you meet at a bar who wants to rant about things but has no real idea of what he's talking about.
Yup, let's get rid of all the White Christians in this countries. Not all of them are terrorists sure, but we have overwhelming evidence that they purposely were engaged in an ongoing campaign to kill the natives residents with guns and disease and import their barbaric eastern legal practices to replace the existing system of laws. Why should we trade our freedom away just so that these genocidal maniacs who hate us can go free?
Radio talk show covered this today. One guest kept claiming that you couldn't trust the encryption experts because they had a financial motivation from Silicon Valley companies. He kept hammering this point over and over despite how ridiculous it was. Encryption is being added by companies because the customers have demanded it.
On the other hand, he never pointed out that law enforcement have their on innate biases towards fewer freedoms. Law enforcement has a long history of pushing hard against privacy boundaries, believe in guilty at first suspicion, etc. If they could get their way, law enforcement would have cameras in everybody's homes for their safety. They have a financial motivation to raise their conviction rates. The problem is that we could always have another J Edgar Hoover clone take charge of the FBI at which point we will need a government able to push back and slap down their attempts at spying on everyone, or the ability for the public to protect themselves with encryption.
Fundamental problem the divide between people who feel it's better for a few guilty people to get away with their crimes as long as this protects innocent people, and others who believe that it's ok for a few innocent people are punished as long as no one guilty gets away with their crimes.
I've got AMD HD 7700, below Fallout 4 minimum specs. It runs the game just fine on medium settings.
So we're making more rules here. That's the point I was making. Fantasy is not a system where anything goes, because there are rules being applied all the time.
It's an annoying fight in the online game I play, Lord of the Rings Online, where some new player wishes for something ridiculous to happen ("the other game I played had floating castles!l") and then they defend it by saying "but it's just a fantasy, so anything can happen").
I think that's why it took me so long to realize it was the wrong tab. Someone disparages Hollywood vs someone disparages NASCAR.
Not true. Most fantasy stories come with rules, unspoken or otherwise. Batman is the good guy. Bilbo can't do magic. Harry Potter needs a wand to cast spells. Glorfindel does not use a rocket launcher.
Because the flaws are so egregious that they've gone beyond merely funny and into face palming territory. Just because it's a movie doesn't mean you can just be stupid about it. Now if the entire premise is bizarre and the world setting is alien, then maybe stretching things is ok (otherwise Anime would fall on its face). But if the entire premise is that the world is just like our own except for a few military combat situations, then having a bridge floating in mid air is just plain dumb.
Believe me, even in something like X-Men, if Wolverine had picked up that Golden Gate bridge instead of Magneto, the fans would have come out of the wood work to say how stupid it was, how it broke all the lore, and what were the writers smoking. But when a bridge is cut in half and manages to defy gravity by not falling down we're supposed to just look the other way instead of noticing that the writers are stupid?
Even the massive cables on the Golden Gate bridge aren't strong enough for that kind is suspension of disbelief.
Sorry, let me retract. I was on the wrong tab and thought this was the structure collapse of bridges article...
You know, I Iook stupid now. I was reading the article about bridge collapses and ended up back on the wrong web browser tab thinking you were talking about how laughing at hollywood was insensitive. Doh! Where's that Slashdot delete button?
Nothing in the article in question is disparaging to anyone except Hollywood writers. So how you are you being alienated? So dumb people versus people of average intelligence is now a "we vs they" issue, and must we give elementary school dropouts equal time? Seems silly since these dumb people are the ones getting all the air time in the cinemas anyway.
So he's a snob for pointing out massive errors performed by snobbish Hollywood writers who are too important to open up a "physics for dumbasses" book?
Hollywood these days is full of the most ridiculous plot elements, stupid science, illogical economics, implausible motivations, and it's gone way beyond the point where you can just ignore it all because of suspension of disbelief. Even the Walking Dead is more believable than your typical AAA movie release.
I use Google+, but I don't use any other Google applications (other than Android). No gmail, no gphoto/picasa/whatever, no hangouts, no youtube (I stay logged out so it can't track me, I don't read/write comments there).
Why do you want it to die? I love it. It's the only social media I use. Is it fair turnabout if I say I hope that Facebook dies?