Good thing the quality of content is still king. However if you have two sites that rank at 100% and one is significantly faster then it comes up first. I can't see how that is bad thing.
Google says this affects a tiny fraction of sites and let's face it, it will be irrelevant when comparing two text only sites. But with the growing web app trend then yes speed does make a difference. If you want to use an online Office replacement, like offline software, you don't want to sit there waiting for things to happen. Online games, like offline, can succeed or fail based on their speed.
The guys at Google aren't dumb. I doubt we'll see pages punished for loading in 100 ms rather than 50ms. However if you take 2 minutes compared to 50 ms then you may be if your content isn't the best and quite frankly I'm happy with that.
That is true. What Google needs to do is make it so you can block something from coming up in any search. I hate seeing Rose India results in my Java searches. I remove them when I find them but if I search for something else it can come up again.
That said I do believe the results are getting better. People find ways to trick Google and they get away with it for a bit but Google does catch on. I just checked for a search on Java servlet tutorial and Rose India ranks much lower than they used to and they're lower than on Bing.
They were punished by Google for that and now expert sex change put the answer at the bottom, after scrolling through 3 or so pages worth of shit. Imo, it's still dodgy and Google should still punish them.
I usually find a relevant link right at the top for products but if you're not then click the shopping link and it is nothing but products. You may not like the results but my guess is the results are spot on otherwise it wouldn't be number one. Keep in mind some people do want price comparisons or just plain info, like you may find on wikipedia.
Google says it's only affecting a tiny fraction of sites anyway, the quality of the content still means more, and it only affects those searching in English on Google.com.
It's probably still an experiment and may go away but with websites becoming more than plain text I'm glad to see performance taken into account.
If I have to view ads I'd much rather view something that I may have interest in rather than all those god awful "whiter teeth" or "perfect abs" ads featuring some man/woman's fat gut on a website.
Targeted ads don't necessarily have to know who I am. They can work with the context of the website and the page's content. Is that really a bad thing?
Either way, if targeted ads mean fewer pay walls then bring it on. I *much* rather have tracking cookies (that I can delete) in my browser than have my payment details on dozens of sites.
I have no problem reading either. The only thing I've ever had issues with is PHP which mixes both camel case and underscore usage. Sometimes when you start using methods you don't use much you can end up forgetting if it's camel case or not.
Other than that, I've had no problem writing/reading Java or PHP in Netbeans, notepad++/vim or even Nano.
Perhaps people find it hard when they stick to one way and only step into the other once in awhile and maybe I find neither to be a problem because I use both on a regular basis.
Maybe I don't mind writing it because I maybe use an IDE that does have code completion for big ass Java package names but I don't think anyone should be writing big Java apps in Notepad and I like something that's descriptive because it, along with decent Java docs can mean not having to look up information on wtf the method/class does.
There is nothing wrong with Camel Case and holding shift to make a capital letter is no different than holding shift to create an underscore_.
The Java name will be much more clear to everyone and you don't have to type it out thanks to shortcuts and code completion. Who the hell writes out System.out.println when you can do sout?
Sure they could have just used sout and while I don't agree with dumbing down programming, that doesn't mean you should go out of your way to make it harder for new people.
At least you can buy the phone unlocked and able to do anything from Google and then take it to any provider. It'll be interesting to see what people actually go for, the open android market or their locked up provider's market since they will have a choice if they want it.
I wouldn't advocate that they lose their rights to their work straight away. But if someone makes a movie from a book that existed 14/28 years ago, for instance, I can't really see myself caring.
They'll either do a good job or not. If they don't it will probably bomb and what harm is really done? Especially seeing how so many bad book (and especially video game) based movies have been done already with the author's blessing.
What happens when someone makes a similar game to God of War? Are they infringing on Sony's copyright by using greek mythology or not? Kratos isn't a name that Sony came up with, it's a Greek god. But should they now get exclusive use of that?
Maybe they wouldn't get control of it but I almost certain they'd take you for court and try if you make a Greek mythology based game that contains a character called Kratos. The mere fact they'd likely do that is enough to scare people off even if Sony would win and creativity is hurt.
That sort of thing should be explained to people and, one quick way to prove a point to people, would be to start harassing them for using copyright material on their sites / blogs when they're simply doing things like using Mario or Mickey for an avatar. It's only a matter of time until companies start doing that anyway.
I fully agree but the point is that ensuring the creator and his family have control over something forever does not ensure the quality of sequels and related work at all.
I would say the fans, who would get in trouble for copyright violation, have treated the Star Wars series better than its creator.
So I believe your argument holds no water. Regarding sequels, don't read them and they effectively don't exist. There is a Beverly Hills Cop 3 but to me it does not exist. Those who want it can watch it and I can avoid it. Everyone wins.
People need to realise they're not the centre of the universe and just because they don't like something doesn't mean it's wrong or bad.
I think his wording is poor. I doubt he wants them to write software they'll use for free. Doing some sort of coding as part of the interview shouldn't be an issue. Like anything else some companies take an interview idea and implement it poorly and some do it right.
Last guy that I knew that took the stance that tests are beneath him was a contractor who worked along side me for £300 a day. He wasn't doing something I couldn't do. I purely didn't have enough time to cover someone's work who had left and cover my own.
I gave him some work for a script that generated files for the main project. There was very little he needed to know about the main project since the XSL to format the data was already complete.
He did a a half assed job and didn't complete it nor did he take on anything I told him. In fact, it wasn't coding (by the look of it) that was the problem. It was his shitty attitude. He felt he knew better and he did not. My guess is his refusal to do a simple little coding test also stems from him thinking he's hot shit. I don't want to work with a cock so next time I run into someone who thinks a test is beneath them, they're definitely going to be told "no thanks" and we'll keep looking.
The best guy I've ever worked with did the test and completed, at best, 40% of it. But he documented why he did what he did and why he didn't achieve 100% completion all completed before I came back to check on him.
Like with the test he just gets in and does it best to his knowledge. Where he's lacking he researches and asks questions rather than acting like an arrogant cock. His code is very good and I can't fault him at all. I believe this comes from his dedication in everything including the interview.
It's easy to say Indians are a problem or any off-shore employee. I know I've had more than my fair share of grief from off-shore devs.
But one thing to keep in mind if your employer is tight then, despite wages being very cheap anyway in those countries, there is a very good chance they're paying Indians less than they should get in their home country as well.
I know for a fact the last off-shore devs I worked with were paid low wages for their country. The people that stayed in the office are often useless. Anyone that was good moved to a better company within their country or more often moved to the US, Canada, UK, etc. They're good and don't need to stay within their country making peanuts.
Companies also think they can sack a load of techies in their country and hire off-shore devs and some how non-techies will be able to communicate what needs to be done. Something they fail at with English speakers and something that is even worse with a language barrier.
India is no different from the US. Some devs are absolutely useless. Some are trying their best but dealing with some moron in another country who thinks he can do his job badly, leaving the Indian without enough info and support, and if the Indian fails it's because he's Indian and it's doesn't really matter if he fucks up because his wage is the equivalent of minimum-wage so it's cheap to re-do it.
No one hears about the good Indian devs because there is nothing to point and laugh at and any decent Indian probably won't work for some shitty off-shoring scheme.
The biggest reason I am against off-shoring isn't some Indian "stealing" my job but because it is so cheap that companies don't put in as much effort and the bar is lowered. Pay everyone the same exact wage and then let the best country win.
But really why does Disney need this? Walt is dead and can't benefit from his creation. Surely Disney, as a huge corporation can come up with one new idea to milk for a few more decades rather than leeching from the dead.
It's not just Walt's mouse either. Most of their content is a rehash of someone else's work.They're quite happy to take advantage of someone else's work and make millions from it. They're just afraid some other corporation will do exactly what they're doing and I have zero sympathy for them.
Plagiarism is to taking someone's work and claiming it as your own. Writing a sequel, unofficial or official is not taking an existing work and claiming it as your own.
There is also the problem that someone may want nothing to with someone else's work but the other guy thinks it is too similar to his work.
While I don't think we'll all of the sudden run out of story ideas in 100 years, we will, more than any other time have so many combinations of names and scenarios created. So it will be an absolute nightmare for anyone to create something. Unless of course you're a major corporation with an army of lawyers.
Hundreds of years ago when most people were illiterate and poor and books / music were still fairly rare so giving someone a monopoly doesn't really matter. In this day and age it's so easy for someone to create music, books, games and movies. Even from their home and again, how are these people supposed to keep on top of all the copyright material and ensure there stuff is original? It can be hard now. It will only get harder over time.
Lastly, the that created Mickey mouse is dead. Why should people continue to be able to live off his work? Hell, why should someone living be able to write one book and expect to collect from that for life when no one worker gets to live off their work for life. You can argue that music lasts longer than serving someone McDonalds food but there are people making peanuts manufacturing goods that will last for much longer than they get paid for it.
Most real artists will create no matter what and in fact a lot of artists were poor. The only people this would really affect are corporations that pump out soulless shallow pop music, video games and movies because they're not really artists. They're in it just for the money and quite frankly I don't care if they decide to quit creating because they feel it isn't worth it.
The majority isn't always right. Are all the people that supported the Nazi party right? Or those that voted for Bush or all those people that supported the sham that is the Iraq war? What about the US opinion of the Japanese during and after WWII?
People will often believe something if someone repeats it enough but that certainly does not make it right or true.
Yeah someone might decide to crap all over Star wars and make a Star Wars sitcom. We must protect material from people who don't value it as much as the creator!
So if Google is supply him with most of his traffic then how is he missing out? Foxnews like to brag about how popular they are. Surely they don't need Google.
How many use Go in their free time? Sure getting paid to program is nice but not everyone does it as a job. It depends on whether you want to know which language will give you more job options or which one is more popular over all.
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing the quality of content is still king. However if you have two sites that rank at 100% and one is significantly faster then it comes up first. I can't see how that is bad thing.
Google says this affects a tiny fraction of sites and let's face it, it will be irrelevant when comparing two text only sites. But with the growing web app trend then yes speed does make a difference. If you want to use an online Office replacement, like offline software, you don't want to sit there waiting for things to happen. Online games, like offline, can succeed or fail based on their speed.
The guys at Google aren't dumb. I doubt we'll see pages punished for loading in 100 ms rather than 50ms. However if you take 2 minutes compared to 50 ms then you may be if your content isn't the best and quite frankly I'm happy with that.
The quality of the content still matters more so link farms don't win just by being faster.
That is true. What Google needs to do is make it so you can block something from coming up in any search. I hate seeing Rose India results in my Java searches. I remove them when I find them but if I search for something else it can come up again.
That said I do believe the results are getting better. People find ways to trick Google and they get away with it for a bit but Google does catch on. I just checked for a search on Java servlet tutorial and Rose India ranks much lower than they used to and they're lower than on Bing.
They were punished by Google for that and now expert sex change put the answer at the bottom, after scrolling through 3 or so pages worth of shit. Imo, it's still dodgy and Google should still punish them.
I usually find a relevant link right at the top for products but if you're not then click the shopping link and it is nothing but products. You may not like the results but my guess is the results are spot on otherwise it wouldn't be number one. Keep in mind some people do want price comparisons or just plain info, like you may find on wikipedia.
Google says it's only affecting a tiny fraction of sites anyway, the quality of the content still means more, and it only affects those searching in English on Google.com.
It's probably still an experiment and may go away but with websites becoming more than plain text I'm glad to see performance taken into account.
If I have to view ads I'd much rather view something that I may have interest in rather than all those god awful "whiter teeth" or "perfect abs" ads featuring some man/woman's fat gut on a website.
Targeted ads don't necessarily have to know who I am. They can work with the context of the website and the page's content. Is that really a bad thing?
Either way, if targeted ads mean fewer pay walls then bring it on. I *much* rather have tracking cookies (that I can delete) in my browser than have my payment details on dozens of sites.
I have no problem reading either. The only thing I've ever had issues with is PHP which mixes both camel case and underscore usage. Sometimes when you start using methods you don't use much you can end up forgetting if it's camel case or not.
/class does.
Other than that, I've had no problem writing/reading Java or PHP in Netbeans, notepad++/vim or even Nano.
Perhaps people find it hard when they stick to one way and only step into the other once in awhile and maybe I find neither to be a problem because I use both on a regular basis.
Maybe I don't mind writing it because I maybe use an IDE that does have code completion for big ass Java package names but I don't think anyone should be writing big Java apps in Notepad and I like something that's descriptive because it, along with decent Java docs can mean not having to look up information on wtf the method
There is nothing wrong with Camel Case and holding shift to make a capital letter is no different than holding shift to create an underscore_.
The Java name will be much more clear to everyone and you don't have to type it out thanks to shortcuts and code completion. Who the hell writes out System.out.println when you can do sout?
Sure they could have just used sout and while I don't agree with dumbing down programming, that doesn't mean you should go out of your way to make it harder for new people.
It is anti-competitive and not really a free-market move. It should be illegal because it limits worthy employees the ability to freely move around.
At least you can buy the phone unlocked and able to do anything from Google and then take it to any provider. It'll be interesting to see what people actually go for, the open android market or their locked up provider's market since they will have a choice if they want it.
I wouldn't advocate that they lose their rights to their work straight away. But if someone makes a movie from a book that existed 14/28 years ago, for instance, I can't really see myself caring.
They'll either do a good job or not. If they don't it will probably bomb and what harm is really done? Especially seeing how so many bad book (and especially video game) based movies have been done already with the author's blessing.
What happens when someone makes a similar game to God of War? Are they infringing on Sony's copyright by using greek mythology or not? Kratos isn't a name that Sony came up with, it's a Greek god. But should they now get exclusive use of that?
Maybe they wouldn't get control of it but I almost certain they'd take you for court and try if you make a Greek mythology based game that contains a character called Kratos. The mere fact they'd likely do that is enough to scare people off even if Sony would win and creativity is hurt.
That sort of thing should be explained to people and, one quick way to prove a point to people, would be to start harassing them for using copyright material on their sites / blogs when they're simply doing things like using Mario or Mickey for an avatar. It's only a matter of time until companies start doing that anyway.
I fully agree but the point is that ensuring the creator and his family have control over something forever does not ensure the quality of sequels and related work at all.
I would say the fans, who would get in trouble for copyright violation, have treated the Star Wars series better than its creator.
So I believe your argument holds no water. Regarding sequels, don't read them and they effectively don't exist. There is a Beverly Hills Cop 3 but to me it does not exist. Those who want it can watch it and I can avoid it. Everyone wins.
People need to realise they're not the centre of the universe and just because they don't like something doesn't mean it's wrong or bad.
I think his wording is poor. I doubt he wants them to write software they'll use for free. Doing some sort of coding as part of the interview shouldn't be an issue. Like anything else some companies take an interview idea and implement it poorly and some do it right.
Last guy that I knew that took the stance that tests are beneath him was a contractor who worked along side me for £300 a day. He wasn't doing something I couldn't do. I purely didn't have enough time to cover someone's work who had left and cover my own.
I gave him some work for a script that generated files for the main project. There was very little he needed to know about the main project since the XSL to format the data was already complete.
He did a a half assed job and didn't complete it nor did he take on anything I told him. In fact, it wasn't coding (by the look of it) that was the problem. It was his shitty attitude. He felt he knew better and he did not. My guess is his refusal to do a simple little coding test also stems from him thinking he's hot shit. I don't want to work with a cock so next time I run into someone who thinks a test is beneath them, they're definitely going to be told "no thanks" and we'll keep looking.
The best guy I've ever worked with did the test and completed, at best, 40% of it. But he documented why he did what he did and why he didn't achieve 100% completion all completed before I came back to check on him.
Like with the test he just gets in and does it best to his knowledge. Where he's lacking he researches and asks questions rather than acting like an arrogant cock. His code is very good and I can't fault him at all. I believe this comes from his dedication in everything including the interview.
It's easy to say Indians are a problem or any off-shore employee. I know I've had more than my fair share of grief from off-shore devs.
But one thing to keep in mind if your employer is tight then, despite wages being very cheap anyway in those countries, there is a very good chance they're paying Indians less than they should get in their home country as well.
I know for a fact the last off-shore devs I worked with were paid low wages for their country. The people that stayed in the office are often useless. Anyone that was good moved to a better company within their country or more often moved to the US, Canada, UK, etc. They're good and don't need to stay within their country making peanuts.
Companies also think they can sack a load of techies in their country and hire off-shore devs and some how non-techies will be able to communicate what needs to be done. Something they fail at with English speakers and something that is even worse with a language barrier.
India is no different from the US. Some devs are absolutely useless. Some are trying their best but dealing with some moron in another country who thinks he can do his job badly, leaving the Indian without enough info and support, and if the Indian fails it's because he's Indian and it's doesn't really matter if he fucks up because his wage is the equivalent of minimum-wage so it's cheap to re-do it.
No one hears about the good Indian devs because there is nothing to point and laugh at and any decent Indian probably won't work for some shitty off-shoring scheme.
The biggest reason I am against off-shoring isn't some Indian "stealing" my job but because it is so cheap that companies don't put in as much effort and the bar is lowered. Pay everyone the same exact wage and then let the best country win.
But really why does Disney need this? Walt is dead and can't benefit from his creation. Surely Disney, as a huge corporation can come up with one new idea to milk for a few more decades rather than leeching from the dead.
It's not just Walt's mouse either. Most of their content is a rehash of someone else's work.They're quite happy to take advantage of someone else's work and make millions from it. They're just afraid some other corporation will do exactly what they're doing and I have zero sympathy for them.
Plagiarism is to taking someone's work and claiming it as your own. Writing a sequel, unofficial or official is not taking an existing work and claiming it as your own.
There is also the problem that someone may want nothing to with someone else's work but the other guy thinks it is too similar to his work.
While I don't think we'll all of the sudden run out of story ideas in 100 years, we will, more than any other time have so many combinations of names and scenarios created. So it will be an absolute nightmare for anyone to create something. Unless of course you're a major corporation with an army of lawyers.
Hundreds of years ago when most people were illiterate and poor and books / music were still fairly rare so giving someone a monopoly doesn't really matter. In this day and age it's so easy for someone to create music, books, games and movies. Even from their home and again, how are these people supposed to keep on top of all the copyright material and ensure there stuff is original? It can be hard now. It will only get harder over time.
Lastly, the that created Mickey mouse is dead. Why should people continue to be able to live off his work? Hell, why should someone living be able to write one book and expect to collect from that for life when no one worker gets to live off their work for life. You can argue that music lasts longer than serving someone McDonalds food but there are people making peanuts manufacturing goods that will last for much longer than they get paid for it.
Most real artists will create no matter what and in fact a lot of artists were poor. The only people this would really affect are corporations that pump out soulless shallow pop music, video games and movies because they're not really artists. They're in it just for the money and quite frankly I don't care if they decide to quit creating because they feel it isn't worth it.
The majority isn't always right. Are all the people that supported the Nazi party right? Or those that voted for Bush or all those people that supported the sham that is the Iraq war? What about the US opinion of the Japanese during and after WWII?
People will often believe something if someone repeats it enough but that certainly does not make it right or true.
Yeah someone might decide to crap all over Star wars and make a Star Wars sitcom. We must protect material from people who don't value it as much as the creator!
They still crash (often) like XP from my experience.
Alot of them run on Windows so that pretty much sums up their security. In the UK, a lot of rail ticket machines are windows too.
The last place I want Windows is where I stick my bank card.
So if Google is supply him with most of his traffic then how is he missing out? Foxnews like to brag about how popular they are. Surely they don't need Google.
I think everyone with at least one brain cell knows Murdoch is a douche bag. He is one person I would gladly say I hope he drops dead tomorrow.
How many use Go in their free time? Sure getting paid to program is nice but not everyone does it as a job. It depends on whether you want to know which language will give you more job options or which one is more popular over all.