People are quite rightly concerned because if there is something wrong with GM food and it gets into nature it's not going to disappear easily. if it can be proven to be safe no one has a problem with it.
Exactly. The redneck states want to scare California into not doing it because they will be infinitely more successful without the southern states dragging them down. They'll have to build a fence along the eastern border though.
I think it's a case that they pick people they can bully and they also give the option of effectively giving the money back plus some of the company will sell Windows phones.
If Android infringes on their patents then they need to go after Google too.
My employers in the UK have had zero problems with me having time off even including nearly a month off in one go. Must suck living in a country where you're expected to be your employer's slave.
Why does google hate freedom and feel the need to tell developers what to do? Besides, the market isn't fragmented according to them so why waste time with this style guide?
Well google did give them free reign to do whatever they want and pretty much everyone in the mobile market has proven they like fucking customers over.
Ok, so if I make an app to use the keyboard on my android phone that's just going to work across the board? They all have the same processor and memory so I can assume that if I push the limits on my phone that it's just going to work fine and dandy on all the others? There is a lot more than just screen size and yes Android does have a problem. No one can agree on the size of the problem but it is there.
You have to care about it and not everyone does. That is what makes the difference between a good coder, mechanic or most any other job that's harder than typing letters or stack shelves.
Most people could draw well too but most people don't want to invest the time into learning it. Same with coding. CA is probably going to be a good start point but it's just that a start point. You won't be a good coder by the end.
Teach yourself programming books can work if you really want to program. It's all about getting started and the continuing on with what you learned. No system will ever make you an awesome programmer. You have to actually do it. So if the books gives you the gist of it and you keep banging away on the keyboard then you will get better.
Why, imo, CodeAcademy will fail is because I'm sure it won't teach you everything (testing, version control, etc), it will likely only give you the basics and it will probably attract people that don't really care about programming but just want a better job or a job. So they'll never move onto the next level. Those that do use it as a beginning to a serious attempt at coding probably will succeed but not straight after the course. They'll have more work on their hands after the fact.
At best it's going to create a load of people that think my job is easy because they've learned how to print hello world 5 times in a row and how to display a date on a web page.
Seriously, it sounds like a money grab by big companies while trying to convince kids there is nothing better to use. An army of visual studio.net developers are not something we need. What about kids that have Apple computers at home or even Linux?
The UK gov doesn't have a good reputation anyway with IT projects so I'm sure this will go wrong.
I agree if we could get.Net on other platforms and it were more compatible and free from fear of disappearing from some or all platforms then yeah it wouldn't be too bad. I'd definitely give it some time.
Maybe if you're not well known enough and big enough the only way to compete is by being more reasonable? I also thought (and I could be wrong) that one of the reasons going to the doctor can be much more expensive in the US is because they get deals to prescribe certain branded medications. Maybe it works out better if the doctor is less biased? After all the NHS will generally try to avoid branded medications and use generics where possible because it's much cheaper.
.Net is just Java if MS created it. Sure it's more modern but it's Windows-centric and aimed at the same exact market as Java. I'll be surprised if it lives as long as Java.
And I'm sure businesses had some influence in that area demanding more Java developers because Java is a nice safe language that can practically write itself. Hell starting certain things in a IDE yields most of your app written for you. Skynet is probably Java. That is why the original judgement day didn't happen. No one factored in the start-up time.
Because they're rich and scared and will buy into the propaganda that says US medical care is better or they realise they're rich and want the pampered treatment you get in the US since you're paying through the nose or maybe the low value of the dollar makes it a better deal when your currency is worth more?.
A McKinsey and Co. report from 2008 found that a plurality of an estimated 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care;[77] the same McKinsey study estimated that 750,000 American medical tourists traveled from the United States to other countries in 2007 (up from 500,000 in 2006).
If you read that link too you'll see some US doctors are making their prices comprable to other countries which again makes it more attractive.
As with anything it's not as straight forward as Fox News makes it in their attacks on socialised medicine.
The open source code you see may satisfy your needs but that doesn't mean Android, for example, is completely clean of backdoors because you don't know what the hardware manufacturer has done with it. If anything open source is creating a false sense of security on platforms like Android.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer open source but I think it's harmful to open source to act as if anything built on open source is automatically superior for security. That could only ever be true if people were forced to use only what you see and that's not the case. That in itself would arguably go against the ideals of open source.
Slashdot Mirror
If M$ wasn't bullying Android hardware companies then I'd agree but that's not the case.
People are quite rightly concerned because if there is something wrong with GM food and it gets into nature it's not going to disappear easily. if it can be proven to be safe no one has a problem with it.
Exactly. The redneck states want to scare California into not doing it because they will be infinitely more successful without the southern states dragging them down. They'll have to build a fence along the eastern border though.
You are free to use Bing if you want.
Which of course the vast majority of people won't do.
I think it's a case that they pick people they can bully and they also give the option of effectively giving the money back plus some of the company will sell Windows phones.
If Android infringes on their patents then they need to go after Google too.
My employers in the UK have had zero problems with me having time off even including nearly a month off in one go. Must suck living in a country where you're expected to be your employer's slave.
Why does google hate freedom and feel the need to tell developers what to do? Besides, the market isn't fragmented according to them so why waste time with this style guide?
Well google did give them free reign to do whatever they want and pretty much everyone in the mobile market has proven they like fucking customers over.
Ok, so if I make an app to use the keyboard on my android phone that's just going to work across the board? They all have the same processor and memory so I can assume that if I push the limits on my phone that it's just going to work fine and dandy on all the others? There is a lot more than just screen size and yes Android does have a problem. No one can agree on the size of the problem but it is there.
You have to care about it and not everyone does. That is what makes the difference between a good coder, mechanic or most any other job that's harder than typing letters or stack shelves.
Most people could draw well too but most people don't want to invest the time into learning it. Same with coding. CA is probably going to be a good start point but it's just that a start point. You won't be a good coder by the end.
Teach yourself programming books can work if you really want to program. It's all about getting started and the continuing on with what you learned. No system will ever make you an awesome programmer. You have to actually do it. So if the books gives you the gist of it and you keep banging away on the keyboard then you will get better.
Why, imo, CodeAcademy will fail is because I'm sure it won't teach you everything (testing, version control, etc), it will likely only give you the basics and it will probably attract people that don't really care about programming but just want a better job or a job. So they'll never move onto the next level. Those that do use it as a beginning to a serious attempt at coding probably will succeed but not straight after the course. They'll have more work on their hands after the fact.
At best it's going to create a load of people that think my job is easy because they've learned how to print hello world 5 times in a row and how to display a date on a web page.
Getting the astroturfing in early.
Seriously, it sounds like a money grab by big companies while trying to convince kids there is nothing better to use. An army of visual studio .net developers are not something we need. What about kids that have Apple computers at home or even Linux?
The UK gov doesn't have a good reputation anyway with IT projects so I'm sure this will go wrong.
I think I would have to agree completely. I can't say I've seen much from java developers around here that impress me.
I agree if we could get .Net on other platforms and it were more compatible and free from fear of disappearing from some or all platforms then yeah it wouldn't be too bad. I'd definitely give it some time.
Maybe if you're not well known enough and big enough the only way to compete is by being more reasonable? I also thought (and I could be wrong) that one of the reasons going to the doctor can be much more expensive in the US is because they get deals to prescribe certain branded medications. Maybe it works out better if the doctor is less biased? After all the NHS will generally try to avoid branded medications and use generics where possible because it's much cheaper.
.Net is just Java if MS created it. Sure it's more modern but it's Windows-centric and aimed at the same exact market as Java. I'll be surprised if it lives as long as Java.
And I'm sure businesses had some influence in that area demanding more Java developers because Java is a nice safe language that can practically write itself. Hell starting certain things in a IDE yields most of your app written for you. Skynet is probably Java. That is why the original judgement day didn't happen. No one factored in the start-up time.
BTW, it should be noted people from the US also go to other countries and funnily enough one country western people go to is India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism#India
In fact more Americans go elsewhere compared to people going to the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism#United_States
A McKinsey and Co. report from 2008 found that a plurality of an estimated 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care;[77] the same McKinsey study estimated that 750,000 American medical tourists traveled from the United States to other countries in 2007 (up from 500,000 in 2006).
If you read that link too you'll see some US doctors are making their prices comprable to other countries which again makes it more attractive.
As with anything it's not as straight forward as Fox News makes it in their attacks on socialised medicine.
But then they would have to go after Microsoft and just about every other corporation making software.
It's actually 3 companies and not just Apple but someone wanted attention so they drew attention to Apple in their submission.
The open source code you see may satisfy your needs but that doesn't mean Android, for example, is completely clean of backdoors because you don't know what the hardware manufacturer has done with it. If anything open source is creating a false sense of security on platforms like Android.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer open source but I think it's harmful to open source to act as if anything built on open source is automatically superior for security. That could only ever be true if people were forced to use only what you see and that's not the case. That in itself would arguably go against the ideals of open source.
I'd be more surprised if there was a corporation whose software didn't have a backdoor into it for a government.
Luckily Firefox is open source so someone has taken care of that. http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/
Any IT department capable of using Google can easily find it.