I've always seen my highest productivity when I feel rested, relaxed, and creative. I love Saturday mornings. Knowledge work is not manual labor where you get things done faster just by putting your back into it longer and harder. Programming is the easiest part of the whole mess we call software development. If it's not, you're doing something wrong. Being able to stop and back up and reassess when you start to put in excessive effort is by far the best, and sometimes the hardest thing to do, and you're not going to do that on Adderall.
when we all found out who was taking over the FCC, I was terrified. Former cable lobbyist, now in charge of the group intended to regulate the same people. But it really looks like wheeler may be the right man for the job
Don't tell me you think he voted his conscience. He can be bought, and one side bought him off harder than the other.
Programmers are sensitive to taking a stance that might bring into question their intelligence, so this is a tough idea to convey sometimes - if a thick book and months of ramp-up are involved to get productive, chances are it's not worth it. The fear of someone saying "you're just not smart enough to use it properly" gets in the way of seeing the truth; generally, the more complicated the tool or framework, the more likely it's crap. I have seen great sins of architecture committed in the name of maintainability that wildly achieved the opposite. And those with the highest degrees were the worst offenders.
developers, not less. Author is under the mistaken impression that more is better. It's not. Code is liability. The more you have, the bigger your problems. Nothing will change that without strong AI, which would be a much, much larger matter.
I see InfoWorld is also the same site that gave us the useless "Java vs. Node.js: An epic battle for developer mind share" article.
It's a constant irritation, reading articles written by so-called science and tech journalists that don't know what they're talking about.
If an individual did this, they'd be arrested and dragged into court (correct me if I'm wrong, this is just what I would expect if I did that myself). Multiply the scale by 10,000 though, and the businesses involved get not even a fine but... a cease-and-desist letter?
Could someone please explain to me - omitting the-world-is-going-to-hell screed - why we tend to prosecute small crimes so much more aggressively than the large ones?
We already know what we should and shouldn't be eating, courtesy the largest study of its kind ever conducted. It's stupidly simple but for some reason nobody wants to hear it.
Summary: Eat a whole-foods, plant-based diet, and get no more than 10% (better, 5%) of your calories from animal protein.
As a simple example, imagine a photon traveling through an expanding universe in a region with no other matter or energy (dark or otherwise). The expansion of space stretches the wavelength of the photon (cosmological redshift, which is distinct from Doppler redshift), causing it to lose energy. The photon loses energy with nothing around it gaining. Energy is lost because spacetime itself is changing, so Noether's theorem doesn't apply.
I wonder if we could add a scale-invariant component, and make the lost energy just a property of measuring it in a non-inflating reference frame.
Or, I should say, I wonder what contradictions that would lead to.
I think it's poor form to respond to AC's, but you were reasonably polite if a little snide.
If you took the time to read the post, you would see that I didn't say I use VB.
Java itself isn't much different from C# so it's not the syntax that's the problem. Its developer community has the worst case cargo-cult engineering and misuse of GoF design patterns I have ever seen.
Overengineering is unnecessary complexity, and that is IMO is the worst sin you can commit in design. Cleaning up that special class of wreckage is much worse than rewriting simple newbie ineptitude. And at least the newbies can be corrected. The others can take months to come around, and it's always kicking and screaming.
For all intents and purposes it is equivalent to C#, which is an excellent language.
I might actually prefer VB to C# because it doesn't have all those damn curly braces and semicolons - VB is much faster to type and the automatic indentation is better. The only dealbreakers for me were the awkward anonymous method syntax and industry stigma.
You want to talk about programmers being ruined, look at what the experienced do with Java.
I'm an insensitive clod, I hadn't thought of literotica.
I quote from CaptQuark:
It takes some extra work to produce a visually appealing page that a screen reader can easily read and navigate after the style sheets are ignored by Jaws. It requires careful planning to design a page with multiple columns (menu column on the left, main content in the middle, additional information on the right) and organizing it so a screen reader can skip to the main content without listening to menu choice after menu choice on every page but still looks appealing to sighted users after the style sheets are applied.
This is an example of what you are not supposed to do. Windows 8 makes an easy example, convolving the needs of different UI paradigms is poor design. Proper application ADA support uses two interfaces, one for the sighted, and another for the blind, designed specifically for use by a text reader. Vi and Emacs do not require such bifurcation, but these are exceptions that prove the point; nobody in their right mind would release these applications to the general public and call them user-friendly.
Customers with ADA requirements never want to pay for including a blind tester, or doing the application architecture properly for text readers. I can and do use W3C guidelines, but I'm no expert and know I'm probably doing it poorly since there's nobody to push back to tell me what I've done right or wrong. I've seen bids double and triple when the ADA requirement is a hard one that will be independently tested. Including good support for the blind in applications is expensive, which is why I thought it might be nice to look at alternatives.
any attempt at artificial intelligence from search, so I don't have to keep using quotes and "verbatim" to tell it that yes, I really WAS looking for exactly what I typed, and not all this useless junk. IMO Google's search results have been getting significantly worse over the last couple of years. Sure, all that research is nice, but please give us the option to not use it.
to provide all blind people with a full-time personal assistant for computer use, than to stick with software ADA requirements.
I'm talking about real applications, not your shitty website. But those, too.
Ever done real ADA testing with a reader? Holy shit. I'd much prefer sighted human help to that. It's not like I'd be looking at porn since I can't see.
getting a call from a headhunter. She'll say something and it will be completely unintelligible because some asshole next to her will be screaming his head off on the phone, or doing "team building" exercises. And at that point I'll politely tell her, "Sorry, but I only work with professional organizations. Please don't call back, I've blacklisted you."
I'm not a physicist, either. Maybe someone can clear these questions up for me.
The paper cites neutrinoless double beta decay as one of its six observations, but from my understanding this phenomena has not yet been observed, and experiments that have claimed to observe it have not been "disputed", but unambiguously discredited.
Also - from my understanding - previous theoretical work stipulated that the FTL component would only be found in internal reference frames via quantum interactions, and the neutrino itself would not and need not travel FTL.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always seen my highest productivity when I feel rested, relaxed, and creative. I love Saturday mornings. Knowledge work is not manual labor where you get things done faster just by putting your back into it longer and harder. Programming is the easiest part of the whole mess we call software development. If it's not, you're doing something wrong. Being able to stop and back up and reassess when you start to put in excessive effort is by far the best, and sometimes the hardest thing to do, and you're not going to do that on Adderall.
we should focus on having any accountability at all.
Yes, but what does it say?
Here is the link.
BBC Full Documentary- 'India's Daughter' on Nirbhaya Delhi Gang Rap | Jyoti singh | HD | Banned
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxkMzBqjgw8
I got through 10 seconds, then page the refreshed and it was blocked from my region (US) on copyright grounds.
Really, what's the point of that?
Linus & Lucy - The Music of Vince Guaraldi
when we all found out who was taking over the FCC, I was terrified. Former cable lobbyist, now in charge of the group intended to regulate the same people. But it really looks like wheeler may be the right man for the job
Don't tell me you think he voted his conscience. He can be bought, and one side bought him off harder than the other.
in case you're interested in learning more about color perception than the links provide.
http://blog.asmartbear.com/color-wheels.html
If you like that, there's even more to read on color theory.
If we get him to say his name backwards, will he go away?
Programmers are sensitive to taking a stance that might bring into question their intelligence, so this is a tough idea to convey sometimes - if a thick book and months of ramp-up are involved to get productive, chances are it's not worth it. The fear of someone saying "you're just not smart enough to use it properly" gets in the way of seeing the truth; generally, the more complicated the tool or framework, the more likely it's crap. I have seen great sins of architecture committed in the name of maintainability that wildly achieved the opposite. And those with the highest degrees were the worst offenders.
I'd mod you up if I could, I was going to say the same things.
Why do these so-called 'editors' keep posting shit articles?
developers, not less. Author is under the mistaken impression that more is better. It's not. Code is liability. The more you have, the bigger your problems. Nothing will change that without strong AI, which would be a much, much larger matter.
I see InfoWorld is also the same site that gave us the useless "Java vs. Node.js: An epic battle for developer mind share" article.
It's a constant irritation, reading articles written by so-called science and tech journalists that don't know what they're talking about.
If an individual did this, they'd be arrested and dragged into court (correct me if I'm wrong, this is just what I would expect if I did that myself). Multiply the scale by 10,000 though, and the businesses involved get not even a fine but... a cease-and-desist letter?
Could someone please explain to me - omitting the-world-is-going-to-hell screed - why we tend to prosecute small crimes so much more aggressively than the large ones?
Controls: 'd' to move left, 'k' to move right, and 'j' to jump.
Zero credibility.
I'd be drawn and quartered, end of contract. Especially for a financial institution.
Every customer I've ever had made it crystal clear what the PII requirements were, and they were no joke.
I guess it's different if you're not in software?
We already know what we should and shouldn't be eating, courtesy the largest study of its kind ever conducted. It's stupidly simple but for some reason nobody wants to hear it.
Summary: Eat a whole-foods, plant-based diet, and get no more than 10% (better, 5%) of your calories from animal protein.
As a simple example, imagine a photon traveling through an expanding universe in a region with no other matter or energy (dark or otherwise). The expansion of space stretches the wavelength of the photon (cosmological redshift, which is distinct from Doppler redshift), causing it to lose energy. The photon loses energy with nothing around it gaining. Energy is lost because spacetime itself is changing, so Noether's theorem doesn't apply.
I wonder if we could add a scale-invariant component, and make the lost energy just a property of measuring it in a non-inflating reference frame.
Or, I should say, I wonder what contradictions that would lead to.
I think it's poor form to respond to AC's, but you were reasonably polite if a little snide.
If you took the time to read the post, you would see that I didn't say I use VB.
Java itself isn't much different from C# so it's not the syntax that's the problem. Its developer community has the worst case cargo-cult engineering and misuse of GoF design patterns I have ever seen.
Overengineering is unnecessary complexity, and that is IMO is the worst sin you can commit in design. Cleaning up that special class of wreckage is much worse than rewriting simple newbie ineptitude. And at least the newbies can be corrected. The others can take months to come around, and it's always kicking and screaming.
For all intents and purposes it is equivalent to C#, which is an excellent language.
I might actually prefer VB to C# because it doesn't have all those damn curly braces and semicolons - VB is much faster to type and the automatic indentation is better. The only dealbreakers for me were the awkward anonymous method syntax and industry stigma.
You want to talk about programmers being ruined, look at what the experienced do with Java.
I quote from CaptQuark:
It takes some extra work to produce a visually appealing page that a screen reader can easily read and navigate after the style sheets are ignored by Jaws. It requires careful planning to design a page with multiple columns (menu column on the left, main content in the middle, additional information on the right) and organizing it so a screen reader can skip to the main content without listening to menu choice after menu choice on every page but still looks appealing to sighted users after the style sheets are applied.
This is an example of what you are not supposed to do. Windows 8 makes an easy example, convolving the needs of different UI paradigms is poor design. Proper application ADA support uses two interfaces, one for the sighted, and another for the blind, designed specifically for use by a text reader. Vi and Emacs do not require such bifurcation, but these are exceptions that prove the point; nobody in their right mind would release these applications to the general public and call them user-friendly.
Customers with ADA requirements never want to pay for including a blind tester, or doing the application architecture properly for text readers. I can and do use W3C guidelines, but I'm no expert and know I'm probably doing it poorly since there's nobody to push back to tell me what I've done right or wrong. I've seen bids double and triple when the ADA requirement is a hard one that will be independently tested. Including good support for the blind in applications is expensive, which is why I thought it might be nice to look at alternatives.
any attempt at artificial intelligence from search, so I don't have to keep using quotes and "verbatim" to tell it that yes, I really WAS looking for exactly what I typed, and not all this useless junk. IMO Google's search results have been getting significantly worse over the last couple of years. Sure, all that research is nice, but please give us the option to not use it.
to provide all blind people with a full-time personal assistant for computer use, than to stick with software ADA requirements.
I'm talking about real applications, not your shitty website. But those, too.
Ever done real ADA testing with a reader? Holy shit. I'd much prefer sighted human help to that. It's not like I'd be looking at porn since I can't see.
I'm guessing it was derived as a portmanteau of "star" and "carnivore."
Seems like a fine example of a malamanteau.
getting a call from a headhunter. She'll say something and it will be completely unintelligible because some asshole next to her will be screaming his head off on the phone, or doing "team building" exercises. And at that point I'll politely tell her, "Sorry, but I only work with professional organizations. Please don't call back, I've blacklisted you."
Not that I was interested to begin with.
The Russians have quite a few Mach 3.0 missiles of which they sold a couple to India and to a lesser degree China
So does that mean they sold China one or zero? That doesn't make any sense. Now you're going to have to cite your sources or I call BS.
I know. Sorry, I read the paper.
I'm not a physicist, either. Maybe someone can clear these questions up for me.
The paper cites neutrinoless double beta decay as one of its six observations, but from my understanding this phenomena has not yet been observed, and experiments that have claimed to observe it have not been "disputed", but unambiguously discredited.
Also - from my understanding - previous theoretical work stipulated that the FTL component would only be found in internal reference frames via quantum interactions, and the neutrino itself would not and need not travel FTL.