Egads. Here I am nearly 50 and I'm still programming.
(And I worked with a guy who literal wrote a book on C++ and he was still doing daily programming in his 70s)
The work is out there..
-- At this point, it is largely a zero-sum game. Every dollar spent on research in one area is a dollar that can't be spent in another area. One disease's gains represent another disease's losses.
The problem is that research isn't targeted like that - especially initial research.
This isn't a case where you "put in X dollars" and pop out a result.
studied.
You have to remember - just 50 years ago, ALL was pretty much a death sentence and it tends to hit kids more than adults.
2nd - this treatment is used AFTER patients had failed to respond or relapsed. So this treatment this roughly an 85% success rate takes it from 90% to what, an almost 98% success rate (overall)?
But the real question (and I haven't seen it answered by anyone yet) is whether or not it'll be effective for Philadelphia chromosome (9/22) patients. (I haven't had a chance to research that yet.) While ALL treatmentment are very good, for ALL Philadelphia patients the prognosis was still poor last I checked.
Comcast offers no services to me if Comcast is not my ISP.
Unless you're very special, do you have some ISP somewhere.
I'm addressing the specific case of an ISP being greedy and thinking they can squeeze, say, NetFlix.
Said ISP can deprioritize NetFlix traffic (The entire case of Net Neutrality or more specifically - removing Net Neutrality)
Now we replace NetFlix with Google (say YouTube).
Said ISP can deprioritize YouTube traffic.
However - the opposite is ALSO true. Google can deprioritize said ISP's traffic. Intentionally slow their traffic TO AN ISP.
this means Google is making THEIR OWN servers slow, so using Google is slow.
No..this means Google is making the connection to THAT ISP slow.
If Google Fiber were my ISP, they have no reason to make Comcast slow from their servers because I wouldn't be accessing Comcast servers
If Google Fiber is in direct competition in an area serviced by Comcast - they have a DAMNED good reason to make google slow for Comcast. It provides one hell of an incentive for customers to switch to Google Fiber if Google Fiber is faster -- and faster can be measured by the customer as how fast Google Servers respond.
if Comcast made everything else slow unless you paid your Google Fiber/Comcast ISP "special charges", that would be violating Net Neutrality
Hint: That's what we're talking about. IF Comcast can prioritize traffic for NetFlix...Google can prioritize traffic for Comcast.
Google has a long way to go before they hit the user numbers that Comcast has.
I'm sure that will make Comcast shareholders very happy.
Google has no reason to do any of this and the other ISPs have nothing to fear unless Google's ISP division plans to do more overbuilding, a term and process which the ISPs certainly invented as one means to prevent competition by raising the cost of market entry.
I"m sure that's what the Cable ISPs think. But last I checked, Google was still sitting a wad of cash and connectivity to customers is a critical business requirement for Google to display ads and get ad revenue.
Anyone who thought they could vote for Trump and their ISP company could raise rates, raise your hand.
Oh, all of you?
Did you guys think that Google might compete with you ISPs? Ever hear of google fibre? Can you imagine if google starts to slow traffic to your ISP? Prioritize data to their own network? No? Interesting.
Did you guys think that Google slow data to your ISP anyway unless you start paying their "special charges for high speed service?" No? Interesting.
ISP should be afraid...very afraid. (They aren't...but they should be)
Third, there is no bank that I am aware of that actually allows for offline transactions.
You need to do more research. Nearly all vendors allow for offline transactions. They merely shift the liability for failed transactions back to the merchant and provide a floor mechanism to be specified by the merchant.
If the merchant wants to accept $5 sales and is willing to take the liability (most do), no problem. If the merchant doesn't want to accept liability....also no problem (the transaction will be failed).
What Source Control Management (SCM) do you use? (Git, SVN, etc? Do you use one?)
What Bug Tracking system (Jira, whatever) do you use? (Do you use one?)
What Migration process do you use? Do you use tools?
I must disagree with another poster. Agile itself is not the problem.
However, if your programmers, etc. are not disciplined....they don't all follow the process that everyone agreed to....that is the problem.
Would be tricky. Small planes already have to wait for larger planes for wake turbulence effects when the larger planes are taking off or landing.
BTW: ever hear of "rotating the airport?" It's a pilot term.
There has been some research which arrive at the conclusion that yes, indeed, password rules are actually bullshit for security.
There's research out there that the world is flat as well.
h arrive at the conclusion that yes, indeed, password rules are actually bullshit for security.
As mentioned in the summary, enforcing password rules will actually block provably safe passwords :
- a base32 encoded 128bit pure random number. It's mathematically provable to be secure (if done by a cryptography-grade true random number generated, it's a 2^128 security, which is pretty good enough). But it's a 25 character long string of alaphanumeric. So it's not mixed case, and doesn't contain punctuation so it will be rejected by most stupid rules (also some rules have size specified as a range [9 to 16 characters], not a minimum [more than 8]. This will also reject a 25-long password).
No argument.
However, there is research back to the 1970 (can't remember the article) of unix where X% were just one character in length. (no joke).
So while the rules 'block' randomly generated passwords that are effective because they don't have a 1 or a ! or whatever, they also block the idiots who don't use a password generator.
And how hard is it to just add a '!' to a randomly generated password to make it pass their stupid tests?
What Atwood wants is a better verification that a password is randomized rather than just blind rules. (Possible but not an easy task)
Considering I have an android phone (and no trouble getting accessories....)
Seriously though. While I would like to agree with you on monopolies, I'm not sure sure that's the case here. There are other tractor companies (including ones from overseas).
I agree that there is a huge corporate interest in moving toward "locked-in" items. But as others have pointed out - that makes openness a huge selling point.
your skills have a 2 year half-life...from a MARKETING perspective.
Let's take it in that order.
I've been reinventing myself every 5 years (roughly). I'll ignore my first 5 year gig (Fortran..sigh), and jump to C. I stopped doing C code (mostly) around 2002. Jump forward 2 years and my C skills are about half as marketable as before. Jump another 2 years and they're 1/4.
Doesn't mean I won't get paid what I'm worth or that jobs aren't out there. Rather, it's harder to find the next gig.
Would you hire someone who hasn't done C for 4 years? That answer should be "maybe".
I think he's a little aggressive. That half-life might be 3-4 years....but other than that, it's fairly accurate.
Slashdot Mirror
Egads. Here I am nearly 50 and I'm still programming. (And I worked with a guy who literal wrote a book on C++ and he was still doing daily programming in his 70s) The work is out there..
So...it wasn't that bad right?
Hell, Irma is only a cat above it.
-- At this point, it is largely a zero-sum game. Every dollar spent on research in one area is a dollar that can't be spent in another area. One disease's gains represent another disease's losses. The problem is that research isn't targeted like that - especially initial research. This isn't a case where you "put in X dollars" and pop out a result.
Philadelphia positive patients (9/22)
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2...
studied. You have to remember - just 50 years ago, ALL was pretty much a death sentence and it tends to hit kids more than adults. 2nd - this treatment is used AFTER patients had failed to respond or relapsed. So this treatment this roughly an 85% success rate takes it from 90% to what, an almost 98% success rate (overall)? But the real question (and I haven't seen it answered by anyone yet) is whether or not it'll be effective for Philadelphia chromosome (9/22) patients. (I haven't had a chance to research that yet.) While ALL treatmentment are very good, for ALL Philadelphia patients the prognosis was still poor last I checked.
Although I'm finally decided to up and pay for an account on Github.
The rule is simple:
Work in git
Work on a feature branch
git add *
git commit 'updating'
git push origin feature/branch
Oh yeah...and you want to back that puppy up.
Trolls are pro-Trump....not against.
You do know there were companies providing "computer-services" BEFORE the internet allowed commercial (public) traffic, right?
Just for those who think that was an outlier... CompuServe AOL Dephi Genie All of these networks charged by the hour for you to access their systems.
by the keystroke, apparently.
In 2007 - he was leftist. But by the time of the shooting.... https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
That said...MOST self-made CEO's are entirely different.
https://developers.slashdot.org/story/17/05/01/146201/power-of-modern-programming-languages-is-that-they-are-expressive-readable-concise-precise-and-executable
Actually I suspect Google has a LOT more strength than you realize.
Google doesn't get paid for advertising revenue -- they SELL advertising to nearly all websites. Some sites will NOT load if the ads aren't there.
So if google slows their ad generation - it snowballs and nearly every site is slow.
Suddenly google fiber is a much better alternative than say verizon fiber.
Alright - I'll spell it out for you.
Unless you're very special, do you have some ISP somewhere.
I'm addressing the specific case of an ISP being greedy and thinking they can squeeze, say, NetFlix.
Said ISP can deprioritize NetFlix traffic (The entire case of Net Neutrality or more specifically - removing Net Neutrality)
Now we replace NetFlix with Google (say YouTube).
Said ISP can deprioritize YouTube traffic.
However - the opposite is ALSO true. Google can deprioritize said ISP's traffic. Intentionally slow their traffic TO AN ISP.
No..this means Google is making the connection to THAT ISP slow.
If Google Fiber is in direct competition in an area serviced by Comcast - they have a DAMNED good reason to make google slow for Comcast. It provides one hell of an incentive for customers to switch to Google Fiber if Google Fiber is faster -- and faster can be measured by the customer as how fast Google Servers respond.
Hint: That's what we're talking about. IF Comcast can prioritize traffic for NetFlix...Google can prioritize traffic for Comcast.
I'm sure that will make Comcast shareholders very happy.
I"m sure that's what the Cable ISPs think. But last I checked, Google was still sitting a wad of cash and connectivity to customers is a critical business requirement for Google to display ads and get ad revenue.
Anyone who thought they could vote for Trump and their ISP company could raise rates, raise your hand.
Oh, all of you?
Did you guys think that Google might compete with you ISPs? Ever hear of google fibre? Can you imagine if google starts to slow traffic to your ISP? Prioritize data to their own network? No? Interesting.
Did you guys think that Google slow data to your ISP anyway unless you start paying their "special charges for high speed service?" No? Interesting.
ISP should be afraid...very afraid. (They aren't...but they should be)
Oh please. Anyone who thought that Trump's administration was going to keep Net Neutrality please raise your hand.
Wait...one person in the back? That's it? Yep. This isn't about Lobbyist money.
You need to do more research. Nearly all vendors allow for offline transactions. They merely shift the liability for failed transactions back to the merchant and provide a floor mechanism to be specified by the merchant.
If the merchant wants to accept $5 sales and is willing to take the liability (most do), no problem. If the merchant doesn't want to accept liability....also no problem (the transaction will be failed).
That's right. Criticize Trump and you go to Jail/Deported! Hail Trump!
What Source Control Management (SCM) do you use? (Git, SVN, etc? Do you use one?) What Bug Tracking system (Jira, whatever) do you use? (Do you use one?) What Migration process do you use? Do you use tools? I must disagree with another poster. Agile itself is not the problem. However, if your programmers, etc. are not disciplined....they don't all follow the process that everyone agreed to....that is the problem.
Would be tricky. Small planes already have to wait for larger planes for wake turbulence effects when the larger planes are taking off or landing. BTW: ever hear of "rotating the airport?" It's a pilot term.
There's research out there that the world is flat as well.
No argument. However, there is research back to the 1970 (can't remember the article) of unix where X% were just one character in length. (no joke). So while the rules 'block' randomly generated passwords that are effective because they don't have a 1 or a ! or whatever, they also block the idiots who don't use a password generator. And how hard is it to just add a '!' to a randomly generated password to make it pass their stupid tests? What Atwood wants is a better verification that a password is randomized rather than just blind rules. (Possible but not an easy task)
Considering I have an android phone (and no trouble getting accessories....) Seriously though. While I would like to agree with you on monopolies, I'm not sure sure that's the case here. There are other tractor companies (including ones from overseas). I agree that there is a huge corporate interest in moving toward "locked-in" items. But as others have pointed out - that makes openness a huge selling point.
your skills have a 2 year half-life...from a MARKETING perspective.
Let's take it in that order.
I've been reinventing myself every 5 years (roughly). I'll ignore my first 5 year gig (Fortran..sigh), and jump to C. I stopped doing C code (mostly) around 2002. Jump forward 2 years and my C skills are about half as marketable as before. Jump another 2 years and they're 1/4.
Doesn't mean I won't get paid what I'm worth or that jobs aren't out there. Rather, it's harder to find the next gig.
Would you hire someone who hasn't done C for 4 years? That answer should be "maybe".
I think he's a little aggressive. That half-life might be 3-4 years....but other than that, it's fairly accurate.
But they WILL be subject to that countries laws.
Such is the life of a Merc. Want the glorious pay?