Yes, the practice of ex-political officials entering industry and using their contacts for lobbying purposes is common. However just because it is a common thing does not make it a good thing.
So true. I wonder how many people know about Mr. Donald Rumsfeld's connection with the approval of something for public consumption that was once proposed as an agent for chemical warfare. Check here for an explanation.
He did the right thing. I wouldn't HAVE friends that pulled this kind of crap. Apparently there are others that feel the same way.
The more I read your response, the more I think you're a complete loser. It would have to be a pretty pathetic person who steals something, and then, rather than face the consequences like a man, goes and beats up his friend for bringing it to someone's attention. He should be THANKING this guy.
Tell the fscking idiots to stop buying from spam! if the economics of the industry fail, then we'll stop seeing spam. Spam only around because people BUY FROM IT.
So true...and this axiom can be applied to other entities as well...RIAA/MPAA for example. It's all economics.
I'd be more worried about what kinds of people a kid might come into contact with while playing the game. I joined a clan while playing Lineage 2- one of the members was 12 or 13- seemed like a nice kid. Several others (much older) acted like complete dipshits most of the time, setting an oh-so-wonderful example for any younger members. Over time, I began to notice this kid picking up the same kinds of behavior. It was unfortunate, to say the least, and is a strong indication that parents need to keep a close eye not only on what kinds of games their kids are playing, but who they're playing them with. The internet and Teamspeak make it possible for all kinds of nasty combinations- and oddly, I've never heard this mentioned in the news.
If parents aren't instlling enough moral fiber in their kids to overcome the influence of video games, then we have a problem...
Part of the problem is that parents are finding out how difficult it is to instill something they either didn't have as kids, or don't have as parents. Either way, it becomes a "do as I say not as I do" situation in many cases, and kids can see right through the hypocrisy.
RTFA. The explicit point he is making here is that in programming, as in all creative professions, being 'good' is not as simple as being experienced. That's practically the definition of what talent is. This is not to say that experience isn't valuable. But it's not the whole story.
I read the article, but unfortunately, your response got me no closer to an answer than the article. I realize there are talented people...but there are also people who have POTENTIAL, and who can meet that potential given the resources to do so.
(Continuing the analogy: A more talented runner will be able to run faster than you do on the same amount of training.)
That's my point...he makes no mention of this aspect of the process. Even though a mediocre programmer might not be able to acquire the same level of talent as one who is gifted, given access to the same resources (or at least some resources), how much BETTER could they be than they are?
Does every "good" programmer have a degree in computer science? Are there exceptions? How can a programmer who might be "average" GET to be a "good" programmer? Can mediocre programmers be MADE into good programmers? This guy seems to be suggesting that it's ok to continue the cycle by doing NOTHING to enhance the abilities of these mediocre programmers. What about hiring a couple of good ones, and then some others who can be ACTIVELY mentored? Isn't that how some other professions work? What is medical internship all about? What about the journeyman status in the building trades? It's all about mentoring and moving people to the next level of expertise.
It is quite possible to include some reasonable controls that determine exactly how this is done. For example...allow the modification of a post only for the first 5 minutes or so after the initial submission. Or simply keep it in a queue until a five-minute grace period is up. After the grace period, it can be added to the other posts, and will no longer be editable. Second, any moderation that may have occurred within that period (assuming there is no grace period) is forfeited. This will prevent the kind of abuse you've mentioned.
The only reason this will be useful is to catch that spelling or grammatical error you notice the split second after you hit the submit button. It's stupid that this happens, but it does.
Some say, "That's what the 'Preview' button is for." Be that as it may, from a UI perspective, it represents an obstacle - there may be only one out of every 10 posts that are messed up and need editing, but in order to catch that ONE, I need to use the Preview function 10 times. It would be alot easier and more effective if I could just edit the offending post.
The constitution only applies to what the government can and can't do.
This is not true. An employer cannot discriminate based on race or religious affiliation, not only because it might be illegal, but it would very clearly violate someone's constitutional rights.
it'll be because he pissed away his oportunities to conduct the war effectively, not because he wasn't better able to pull the wool over our eyes.
Any war at all is an attempt to pull the wool over our eyes. Remember the original reason for this "war" was this hysterical notion that Iraq housed weapons of mass destruction. Since none were found, some might claim that is not a war at all, but an out-and-out invasion. I've seen various attempts to spin this mess into something the American public will choke down...like using current "acts of terrorism" in Iraq to justify the so-called "war on terror". The tail is now wagging the dog, and it's no-win situation.
And where there are willing parties, trade will occur. On the flipside, where one party is unwilling, trade ceases. When trade ceases, it forces the vendor into the position of having to re-evaluate their offerings - including their terms. It is so easy to put an end to this garbage once and for all, but as long as people feel like their short-term entertainment fix is far more important than the choices they have, and the freedom to exercise those choices, this nonsense will continue. I have no sympathy- consumers are putting themselves into this mess.
I'm curious as to what people think is "too old" for IT? I'd say that there could easily be problems where someone refuses to keep abreast of newer technology, but for someone who finds this an interesting challenge, how old is too old?
THere was a decision in early 1980 that dealt with an engineer who attempted to patent to a physical process controlled by software. Initially the USPTO refused, stating that software was not patentable, and merely wrapping within the context of a physical process did not change anything. A decision by the SCOTUS stated differently. However, the SCOTUS did not out-and-out say that software was patentable - it simply stated that, patenting a physical process controlled by software does not constitute an attempt to patent the software itself, but merely the collective whole of the implementation (the case was Diamond vs Diehr).
When people saw this, (i.e. lawyers), they interpreted it to mean that software was now patentable, and thus began the ball rolling. The USPTO, for whatever reason, has allowed the patents to continue, but I'm still not sure if there is any specific decision which explicitly addresses the issue of patents acquired for software in and of itself.
I was doing some reading the other day, and based on what I found, I'm not certain that software, technically, and legally, is patentable. The latest ruling determined that the loading of software into a machine makes it into a new machine, and thus, patentable, but it didn't go so far as to say that software, by itself, is patentable- the USPTO has held that software is primarily a series of mathematical algorithms, and as such cannot be patented. I'm wondering if there's still a fundamental question here that needs to be decided by the courts.
I think the open source community should start worrying. IT doesn't have any patents, and most likely will not be pursuing any. It also doesn't have the deep pockets that will be required to defend against someone claiming ownership of a specific method. Are there any other options besides making the software unavailable, or changing it so much that it may no longer meet the objectives set forth by its original author?
But this IS trivial...ambient volume goes up...it's exciting...volume goes down, boring. Have you even seen a group of fans stoic during an exciting event? They're probably all screaming their heads off, and the announcer probably sounds like he's about to have a coronary.
Um, last time I checked, there are over 1 million unintended pregnancies among teens each year. Yes, sex is free, it's natural, but it's not a toy. There are certain realities associated with sexuality and the human condition that transcend any laws, moral framework, or political affiliation.
No big deal...Democrats and Republicans are more a like than they are different - they are bound tightly by their common lust for money and control. Where it comes from, and however its acquisition is justified, is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, the practice of ex-political officials entering industry and using their contacts for lobbying purposes is common. However just because it is a common thing does not make it a good thing.
So true. I wonder how many people know about Mr. Donald Rumsfeld's connection with the approval of something for public consumption that was once proposed as an agent for chemical warfare. Check here for an explanation.
He did the right thing. I wouldn't HAVE friends that pulled this kind of crap. Apparently there are others that feel the same way.
The more I read your response, the more I think you're a complete loser. It would have to be a pretty pathetic person who steals something, and then, rather than face the consequences like a man, goes and beats up his friend for bringing it to someone's attention. He should be THANKING this guy.
Tell the fscking idiots to stop buying from spam! if the economics of the industry fail, then we'll stop seeing spam. Spam only around because people BUY FROM IT.
So true...and this axiom can be applied to other entities as well...RIAA/MPAA for example. It's all economics.
I'd be more worried about what kinds of people a kid might come into contact with while playing the game. I joined a clan while playing Lineage 2- one of the members was 12 or 13- seemed like a nice kid. Several others (much older) acted like complete dipshits most of the time, setting an oh-so-wonderful example for any younger members. Over time, I began to notice this kid picking up the same kinds of behavior. It was unfortunate, to say the least, and is a strong indication that parents need to keep a close eye not only on what kinds of games their kids are playing, but who they're playing them with. The internet and Teamspeak make it possible for all kinds of nasty combinations- and oddly, I've never heard this mentioned in the news.
If parents aren't instlling enough moral fiber in their kids to overcome the influence of video games, then we have a problem...
Part of the problem is that parents are finding out how difficult it is to instill something they either didn't have as kids, or don't have as parents. Either way, it becomes a "do as I say not as I do" situation in many cases, and kids can see right through the hypocrisy.
What about on the sidewalk across the street?
Um, public property?
RTFA. The explicit point he is making here is that in programming, as in all creative professions, being 'good' is not as simple as being experienced. That's practically the definition of what talent is. This is not to say that experience isn't valuable. But it's not the whole story.
I read the article, but unfortunately, your response got me no closer to an answer than the article. I realize there are talented people...but there are also people who have POTENTIAL, and who can meet that potential given the resources to do so.
(Continuing the analogy: A more talented runner will be able to run faster than you do on the same amount of training.)
That's my point...he makes no mention of this aspect of the process. Even though a mediocre programmer might not be able to acquire the same level of talent as one who is gifted, given access to the same resources (or at least some resources), how much BETTER could they be than they are?
Does every "good" programmer have a degree in computer science? Are there exceptions? How can a programmer who might be "average" GET to be a "good" programmer? Can mediocre programmers be MADE into good programmers? This guy seems to be suggesting that it's ok to continue the cycle by doing NOTHING to enhance the abilities of these mediocre programmers. What about hiring a couple of good ones, and then some others who can be ACTIVELY mentored? Isn't that how some other professions work? What is medical internship all about? What about the journeyman status in the building trades? It's all about mentoring and moving people to the next level of expertise.
It is quite possible to include some reasonable controls that determine exactly how this is done. For example...allow the modification of a post only for the first 5 minutes or so after the initial submission. Or simply keep it in a queue until a five-minute grace period is up. After the grace period, it can be added to the other posts, and will no longer be editable. Second, any moderation that may have occurred within that period (assuming there is no grace period) is forfeited. This will prevent the kind of abuse you've mentioned.
The only reason this will be useful is to catch that spelling or grammatical error you notice the split second after you hit the submit button. It's stupid that this happens, but it does.
Some say, "That's what the 'Preview' button is for." Be that as it may, from a UI perspective, it represents an obstacle - there may be only one out of every 10 posts that are messed up and need editing, but in order to catch that ONE, I need to use the Preview function 10 times. It would be alot easier and more effective if I could just edit the offending post.
Hold more union meetings. Vary the location. Turn some of them into union-organized and sponsored events - pep rallys, competitions, socials, etc.
The constitution only applies to what the government can and can't do.
This is not true. An employer cannot discriminate based on race or religious affiliation, not only because it might be illegal, but it would very clearly violate someone's constitutional rights.
good luck with your game. I hope you find the talent that you need.
it'll be because he pissed away his oportunities to conduct the war effectively, not because he wasn't better able to pull the wool over our eyes.
Any war at all is an attempt to pull the wool over our eyes. Remember the original reason for this "war" was this hysterical notion that Iraq housed weapons of mass destruction. Since none were found, some might claim that is not a war at all, but an out-and-out invasion. I've seen various attempts to spin this mess into something the American public will choke down...like using current "acts of terrorism" in Iraq to justify the so-called "war on terror". The tail is now wagging the dog, and it's no-win situation.
And where there are willing parties, trade will occur. On the flipside, where one party is unwilling, trade ceases. When trade ceases, it forces the vendor into the position of having to re-evaluate their offerings - including their terms. It is so easy to put an end to this garbage once and for all, but as long as people feel like their short-term entertainment fix is far more important than the choices they have, and the freedom to exercise those choices, this nonsense will continue. I have no sympathy- consumers are putting themselves into this mess.
With a few reasonable controls in place, it's not something that is unworkable.
I'm curious as to what people think is "too old" for IT? I'd say that there could easily be problems where someone refuses to keep abreast of newer technology, but for someone who finds this an interesting challenge, how old is too old?
Don't you have homework to do?
Do you have a case you can cite?
THere was a decision in early 1980 that dealt with an engineer who attempted to patent to a physical process controlled by software. Initially the USPTO refused, stating that software was not patentable, and merely wrapping within the context of a physical process did not change anything. A decision by the SCOTUS stated differently. However, the SCOTUS did not out-and-out say that software was patentable - it simply stated that, patenting a physical process controlled by software does not constitute an attempt to patent the software itself, but merely the collective whole of the implementation (the case was Diamond vs Diehr).
When people saw this, (i.e. lawyers), they interpreted it to mean that software was now patentable, and thus began the ball rolling. The USPTO, for whatever reason, has allowed the patents to continue, but I'm still not sure if there is any specific decision which explicitly addresses the issue of patents acquired for software in and of itself.
I was doing some reading the other day, and based on what I found, I'm not certain that software, technically, and legally, is patentable. The latest ruling determined that the loading of software into a machine makes it into a new machine, and thus, patentable, but it didn't go so far as to say that software, by itself, is patentable- the USPTO has held that software is primarily a series of mathematical algorithms, and as such cannot be patented. I'm wondering if there's still a fundamental question here that needs to be decided by the courts.
I think the open source community should start worrying. IT doesn't have any patents, and most likely will not be pursuing any. It also doesn't have the deep pockets that will be required to defend against someone claiming ownership of a specific method. Are there any other options besides making the software unavailable, or changing it so much that it may no longer meet the objectives set forth by its original author?
But this IS trivial...ambient volume goes up...it's exciting...volume goes down, boring. Have you even seen a group of fans stoic during an exciting event? They're probably all screaming their heads off, and the announcer probably sounds like he's about to have a coronary.
Yes, I am a strong advocate of education...especially if it's comprehesive.
Um, last time I checked, there are over 1 million unintended pregnancies among teens each year. Yes, sex is free, it's natural, but it's not a toy. There are certain realities associated with sexuality and the human condition that transcend any laws, moral framework, or political affiliation.
Umm, a *DEMOCRAT* Senator is calling for this.
No big deal...Democrats and Republicans are more a like than they are different - they are bound tightly by their common lust for money and control. Where it comes from, and however its acquisition is justified, is irrelevant.