In my 10+ years of experience in the field, I have learned and come to appreciate that it's important to strive for clean code. Simplicity is often a side effect, but you can model vastly complex concepts still in a clean way. To me, therein lies the art.
"If someone gives you a time estimate: multiply with two, add one and go to the next bigger unit. E.g. if another developers says he needs one hour, take 3 days. Proceed similar with costs others tell you (unless you have a binding offer)."
Seriously?
When I tell my manager that something will take approximately 2 weeks, he's NOT going to schedule 5 months. What good is an estimate at all if you're going to give yourself a +/- 1000% margin?
Where I work, we are asked at a minimum to provide a Class D estimate, which is a ballpark estimate, -25% to +75%.
My management, in particular, expects that I will have at least a vague clue about how much work is involved in a given activity, and having done similar work before would at least be able to hit it somewhere in the ballpark.
I like to use PERT estimates, or something similar:
estimate = (optimistic + (4 * likely) + pessimistic) / 6
So my 2 weeks (likely) becomes:
(1wks + (4 * 2wks) + 6wks) / 6 = 2.5 weeks
I'm in the same boat, and I agree.
I have a degree in Computer Systems Engineering from an accredited institution, but I don't consider what I do at work "engineering", so I don't call myself an engineer in connection to my job.
To answer the question posed in the main post, we call those people "Web Developers" where I work.
I wasn't able to glean the date that this clock will start officially ticking, or what will happen when the 10,000 years is up.
But I hope that the creators document these things in a way that will be unambiguous to earthlings of our distant future - or else they may be creating yet another year in which apocalypse will be predicted, perhaps somewhere around 12012?
Like 2012 all over again...
Maybe...
It would certainly be easier for record companies to sue grads, because schools implementing such a scheme would have had to be tracking all of the file sharing on campus. I think getting to that point would be beyond the abilities of your average campus facilities, but if they did they'd suddenly have a convenient store of information on who has been sharing what with whom.
But yeah, I don't think this will happen anytime soon.
I don't believe this for a second.
You know what, skip the "spin" detection. Let's look at outright lie detection.
If factcheck.org can be trusted, which I believe it can, I believe McCain has been caught spreading more outright falsehoods than Obama in this election.
And you know what? Facts and fact checking matters more to me than how "spinny" a politician sounds.
My appologies, I did not draw any distinction between a story where the facts speak for themselves and one where there could be various different interpretations.
My intended emphasis was that news is news and opinion is opinion, and that news sites should be treated with the same journalistic standards that stories get when broadcast on television, whereas blogs are clearly a free speech zone where opinion is probably going to be more prevalent than cold hard facts, and should not be held to the same journalistic standards.
We need new ideas, new ways of thinking about issues, each other, and ourselves in order to evolve as a society and as a species.
... in my opinion - which I would surely demand the continuing freedom to express.
Now, for any organization that claims to be journalistic in nature *of course* balance is essential.
That includes online news sites, which should not be trying to swaying opinion but rather about conveying facts in the most objective way possible in order to keep the public informed.
But bloggers are not news agencies. They are simply a measure of the attitudes and opinions of people at large, so I can think of no good reason to impose some kind of balance on that. Doing so would only stifle our evolution toward a better humanity.
Imposing balance on a blogger online is no different than imposing balance on someone standing on a soap box at the street corner. It's optional, not required.
Regardless of any other side effects this could have, it occurs to me once again that we're basically sabotaging our own physical evolution.
How does survival of the fittest apply if there's no particular genetic requirement for being more fit than another?
I suppose in the future, our evolution will instead be tied to the amount of financial resources one has at their disposal, turning survival of the fittest into survival of the wealthiest.
Indeed.
I would go a step further, in fact.
I would argue that we live in a sick society with screwed up priorities. I think people spend more time trying to live up to some ideals that have been force fed to them than actually taking the time to think about what they really value in life, and what alternatives there might be to achieving personal happiness.
Given the above, being parts of this sick society, it makes sense that not everyone would have the right circumstances in their lives or mental fortitude to be able to deal with the more fundamental issue: how to live in a society that isn't working for you.
Amen brotha!
Having been through this grind myself several times (from being depressed to "recovering" from it), I can say that I fully agree with you here.
And sadly, the world is NOT a fair place. But that's reality.
Bad shit happens to good people, and vice versa.
For me, getting through depression involved a combination of things including but not limited to: drugs, therapy, nonjudgemental support from good friends, physical activity, full body relaxation, meditation (as in clearing the mind -- I won't get into spirituality here).
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, should have said "clean" - typing on a blackberry (let the mocking begin!)
In my 10+ years of experience in the field, I have learned and come to appreciate that it's important to strive for clean code. Simplicity is often a side effect, but you can model vastly complex concepts still in a clean way. To me, therein lies the art.
I'm wondering the same thing....... Anyone?
Yes, when you look at it that way, your answer makes sense.
Thanks for clarifying.
Seriously?
When I tell my manager that something will take approximately 2 weeks, he's NOT going to schedule 5 months. What good is an estimate at all if you're going to give yourself a +/- 1000% margin?
Where I work, we are asked at a minimum to provide a Class D estimate, which is a ballpark estimate, -25% to +75%.
My management, in particular, expects that I will have at least a vague clue about how much work is involved in a given activity, and having done similar work before would at least be able to hit it somewhere in the ballpark.
I like to use PERT estimates, or something similar:
estimate = (optimistic + (4 * likely) + pessimistic) / 6
So my 2 weeks (likely) becomes: (1wks + (4 * 2wks) + 6wks) / 6 = 2.5 weeks
YMMV
I'm in the same boat, and I agree. I have a degree in Computer Systems Engineering from an accredited institution, but I don't consider what I do at work "engineering", so I don't call myself an engineer in connection to my job. To answer the question posed in the main post, we call those people "Web Developers" where I work.
I wasn't able to glean the date that this clock will start officially ticking, or what will happen when the 10,000 years is up. But I hope that the creators document these things in a way that will be unambiguous to earthlings of our distant future - or else they may be creating yet another year in which apocalypse will be predicted, perhaps somewhere around 12012? Like 2012 all over again...
Oddly, his glasses keep turning up in women's locker rooms.
Maybe... It would certainly be easier for record companies to sue grads, because schools implementing such a scheme would have had to be tracking all of the file sharing on campus. I think getting to that point would be beyond the abilities of your average campus facilities, but if they did they'd suddenly have a convenient store of information on who has been sharing what with whom. But yeah, I don't think this will happen anytime soon.
But I guess now they're going to shut off the internets. Clearly the internets are full of evil doers.
I don't believe this for a second. You know what, skip the "spin" detection. Let's look at outright lie detection. If factcheck.org can be trusted, which I believe it can, I believe McCain has been caught spreading more outright falsehoods than Obama in this election. And you know what? Facts and fact checking matters more to me than how "spinny" a politician sounds.
... welcome our new blubbery overlord.
Plain black *IS* my preferred background. Ha ha... suckers.
My appologies, I did not draw any distinction between a story where the facts speak for themselves and one where there could be various different interpretations. My intended emphasis was that news is news and opinion is opinion, and that news sites should be treated with the same journalistic standards that stories get when broadcast on television, whereas blogs are clearly a free speech zone where opinion is probably going to be more prevalent than cold hard facts, and should not be held to the same journalistic standards.
.. is not conducive to social evolution.
... in my opinion - which I would surely demand the continuing freedom to express.
We need new ideas, new ways of thinking about issues, each other, and ourselves in order to evolve as a society and as a species.
Now, for any organization that claims to be journalistic in nature *of course* balance is essential. That includes online news sites, which should not be trying to swaying opinion but rather about conveying facts in the most objective way possible in order to keep the public informed.
But bloggers are not news agencies. They are simply a measure of the attitudes and opinions of people at large, so I can think of no good reason to impose some kind of balance on that. Doing so would only stifle our evolution toward a better humanity.
Imposing balance on a blogger online is no different than imposing balance on someone standing on a soap box at the street corner. It's optional, not required.
At least that's the way I see it.
*steps off soap box*
Regardless of any other side effects this could have, it occurs to me once again that we're basically sabotaging our own physical evolution. How does survival of the fittest apply if there's no particular genetic requirement for being more fit than another?
I suppose in the future, our evolution will instead be tied to the amount of financial resources one has at their disposal, turning survival of the fittest into survival of the wealthiest.
Indeed. I would go a step further, in fact. I would argue that we live in a sick society with screwed up priorities. I think people spend more time trying to live up to some ideals that have been force fed to them than actually taking the time to think about what they really value in life, and what alternatives there might be to achieving personal happiness. Given the above, being parts of this sick society, it makes sense that not everyone would have the right circumstances in their lives or mental fortitude to be able to deal with the more fundamental issue: how to live in a society that isn't working for you.
Amen brotha! Having been through this grind myself several times (from being depressed to "recovering" from it), I can say that I fully agree with you here. And sadly, the world is NOT a fair place. But that's reality. Bad shit happens to good people, and vice versa. For me, getting through depression involved a combination of things including but not limited to: drugs, therapy, nonjudgemental support from good friends, physical activity, full body relaxation, meditation (as in clearing the mind -- I won't get into spirituality here).
My thoughts exactly. Of course if there were a space elevator, securing it might be a big challenge.