> Pine has done the colouration of emails based upon criteria for years now, and it is a most useful feature that I would like to see in other email clients.
My original post was a rant, I expected some fun reactions; this response to "jav1231" isn't to pick on him/her, it's just to clarify a few things. For instance, I strongly identify myself as a "geek", I'm extremely technology focused.
I don't want IT to be populated by my version of "profs", and anyway, I find the "props" comment weird. Why shouldn't I work with people of that calibre? I work with several PhDs. (And yes, I know, there are several people with BScs who're just as good, and/or better to work with).
Next up, I didn't major in MIS. It was BSc Astrophysics & Computer Science, PhD in Astrophysics. I don't think those are "token exams". I also don't think they're that useful for my current work though, which is why there are 103 technical books in my cupboard. And no, I don't have an MCSE or similiar one-vendor "qualification".
Next, I'm not a yes man. Trust me, those who work with me would laugh at that comment! I don't see myself on the rung to middle management, and don't make a point of playing politics either.
Next, I'm not a system admin. I'm a software designer. Not all IT staff fit the MIS profile.
However, I *agree* with you in regard to "I'm doing my job" and "I am a professional". That's what I was trying to say! Why would I want, as another poster said, a climbing wall at work? I'll go and pursue my leisure pursuits when I'm not at work. I don't care if you think Star Wars is best film ever made (and yes, I do have the videos) - I might agree, I might disagree, doesn't matter. It's got nothing to do with work! Decorating your cubicle with tradeshow posters - fine. Decorating your posters with one or two personal affects - fine. Annoying the shit out of co-workers trying to concentrate by firing nerf guns, and playing novelty tunes on your latest greatest mobile - not professional!
I've a love of a certain type of "geek" culture, the old fashioned tradition which originated in scientific labs and ham radio shacks. I like the idea of playing with the new toys to see what they do, I like the idea that if I want to know something I put the effort in and eat the books and specs, I like the idea of freely releasing what I've learned to help others. I like the iconoclastic ideal of being interested in interesting things and scorning those which are just to make money (ideally, the interesting things ARE those which make money). What I don't like is the recent trend of replacing the fiercely independent back room engineer image with the favoured self-image of/. - a fat buffon tricked out in a Tux hat, a Star Wars t-shirt, Jolt cola stuffed into pockets alongside PDAs and novelty flashing LED key-ring fobs.
Maybe I'm weird. I don't want toys. My list: 1) Upper quartile pay for my work location and expertise. 2) Pension scheme. 3) Health insurance. 4) Bonuses/options. 5) No dress code. 6) Novel and interesting work domain. 7) Access to powerful development and test machines. 8) Choice of technologies for projects.
Re:I'll tell you how to keep us happy
on
Managing Einsteins
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I know you're being funny...I hate this self-stereotyping of technical staff.
I don't want free sodas at work (I do like the subsidised canteen to be decent quality though), I don't want junk food, I don't want trash all over cubicle, I don't obsess about [Monty Python|Star Wars|LoTR], I don't want to fire Nerf Guns at fellow employees - I want to be treated like a mature professional doing a professional job.
I want money not some novelties scattered around the room. I want a quiet office, not a playpen. I agree that I want to know when the business is on the slide. I want influence and respect from people in suits. I want to be understood when I talk at project meetings. I want an understanding in the manager's head of why what I'm telling matters.
Tricking out your cubicle with action figures etc is just begging to be treated like a child. No wonder your boss seems like the PHB; to him/her you probably seem like a child. Or worse, a social misfit, a weirdo. Someone who's useful but fundementally unreliable.
Secondly, I don't see much "geek attitude" or reviews of Episode II trailers in mainstream trade journals (Dr Dobbs, Appication Development Advisor, Software Development) or in more seriously coding forums. In my experience, and I know this is pressing buttons, those who most loudly beg for ping-pong tables in work are those with the most inflated egos and least developed skills. Lets face it/., there's an opinion among many developers that the crowd here is nothing but a bunch of schoolkids with delusions of knowledge; don't feed them.
I didn't like the tone of the interview; RMS came across as very idealistic, with a very "hippy" view. I know this is not how the whole story goes, but that's the impression this interview gives. I'd have liked to have seen some more concrete discussion of what benefits there are to business users, or home users. I'd have liked to see the word "monopoly" in there and discussion about how much software is costing various users, how free software would affect business models. Better yet, I'd have liked to have seen discussion of how free software has and is affecting several fields - academic, educational, scientific, server-farms. The man in the street doesn't know that other systems exist, some quick pointers to some prominent e-business sites or famous projects would setup association between "free software" and "good" rather than "free software" and what Cartman would call, "tree hugging hippy crap".
Unsure what the time delay mentioned above is about. I assume the robots work in tandem with each other; being close to each other means minimal lag when co-ordinating the lighting. The only delay is transmitting pictures back of course.
Server seems to have tumbled over already so I can't check but it's interesting to consider what sort of lighting metrics they use - a human at home can say, "That's looks nicer lit like that." but what criteria should be used for autonomous work? Highest constrast? Smallest resolvable feature?
That's an interesting point - lichens and bacteria are highly unlikely to survive the journey (vacuum, extreme temperatures, radiation), but what about viruses? They're hardy little suckers, anyone know for sure what their limits are?
Thanks for the pointers, however, it's still not a viable option for me to run downtown (in the UK) and return with a Windowless computer.
Everything I can buy on the highstreet is either a Mac or a Windows PC. While I realise that there are tailored services they suffer from one problem - I can't walk in and ask for help. Remember I don't know what I want. I wouldn't know DDR if it bit me. All I want is a no-frills, quiet PC that I can slap Linux and a few compilers onto to play. I'm not stupid, I'm a professional programmer. What type of power-supply I want is as relevant to me as it is to my Dad. I don't want to know, I want someone to help me out by selling me something.
I've hit the same problem; I'm a software person, always have been, always will be. I can't build my own machine without help, but I know more than the average consumer in as much as I don't want to pay for a DVD drive, speakers, fancy keyboard etc. I want the box. In the same way that I don't need speakers I don't need, or want, WindowsXP. Can I find anywhere that is selling commodity PC, as opposed to commodity Windows boxes? Nope.
That's the number one core argument for competition. Why must I pay for a product I do not want?
I disagree. I work a large telecommunications company which has been crushed by the past year. The dotcom implosion was predicted and it's a very different world for a technologist post-that. I don't see 9-11 having an impact on my job or the IT market as a whole. In fact, the increased international tension has further damaged economies already shaky from the dotcom bust.
There is no new boom. There can't be and there won't be. There will be a very slow and steady growth; the assets which need to shift first to revive the industry are telecommunications based. They're expensive. $10s of millions expensive. Committing to such projects takes time. Consumers cannot drive the demand for new net services, not in the same way the can for other commodity goods. There must be framework. It's like wanting new trains. You simply don't get startup railroads, who can afford the track?
What many IT folks miss is that much of the industry we're in is invisible. Consumers don't know what I do, or why my job is needed. All they know is that the internet is still slow, TV is still TV and that most of those new fangled interactive services are too expensive and trivial to bother with. IT cannot sustain growth with the consumer need, and, with my consumer hat on, I'm not prepared to pay through the nose for broadband, don't like interactive TV and haven't got a PDA/laptop etc. Without this low level demand and we're in a minor global depression remember, there will be no significant IT recovery for a few years. No months, years. 5-10. No boom, just steady industrial scale growth, like everyone else.
Sorry people, but in case you haven't noticed, society has, at least since the industrial revolution, been falling apart. You don't read a lot of history books do you? Because what you've written is nonsense. How many people complaining about the RIP in this thread wrote to their MP over the issue? (I did.)
Do people still use Usenet?! Yes. A lot. I check through Usenet on a daily basis, just after I check Slashdot. The difference is that it's extremely rare that I try to follow a discussion here - it's slow and very clumsy using a web message board compared to a Usenet group and Usenet reader. (s/moderation/killfile/ for example) For what it's worth I object to Deja sticking adverts in my posts. I am happy for my posts to be archived provided they're reproduced as I originally intended. Adding ads violates that as I understand the legal discussions I've been following on usenet... which was better informed (seemingly) than that I've read here.
"No, you'll have programmers who understand the whole system"
You will? I've been in my current job for 14 months, and I still don't even understand my own subsystem (40+K of C++ involved with network management systems and multiplexers).
The whole system here is just under a MLOC of complex code. (Okay, so it's legacy, but aren't most systems? Especially those where you need to turn things on their heads to meet new pressures)
We rotate staff frequently, in 14 months we've had 13 people leave (mostly internal transfers). That's bad for a team which has about 7 developers (plus 3 integration/test people).
Swapping people doesn't work. Learning time soaks up any and all advantage in bringing in even highly experienced people.
Aside from that much of the XP rules are okay, but not shockingly novel. I've been pair programming and constantly peer reviewing for months, it helps, but the single most important thing on a big project isn't mentioned in the XP book (skimmed it only so far) - source control.
Slashdot Mirror
> Pine has done the colouration of emails based upon criteria for years now, and it is a most useful feature that I would like to see in other email clients.
To be fair, Outlook (2000) does this too.
My original post was a rant, I expected some fun reactions; this response to "jav1231" isn't to pick on him/her, it's just to clarify a few things. For instance, I strongly identify myself as a "geek", I'm extremely technology focused.
/. - a fat buffon tricked out in a Tux hat, a Star Wars t-shirt, Jolt cola stuffed into pockets alongside PDAs and novelty flashing LED key-ring fobs.
I don't want IT to be populated by my version of "profs", and anyway, I find the "props" comment weird. Why shouldn't I work with people of that calibre? I work with several PhDs. (And yes, I know, there are several people with BScs who're just as good, and/or better to work with).
Next up, I didn't major in MIS. It was BSc Astrophysics & Computer Science, PhD in Astrophysics. I don't think those are "token exams". I also don't think they're that useful for my current work though, which is why there are 103 technical books in my cupboard. And no, I don't have an MCSE or similiar one-vendor "qualification".
Next, I'm not a yes man. Trust me, those who work with me would laugh at that comment! I don't see myself on the rung to middle management, and don't make a point of playing politics either.
Next, I'm not a system admin. I'm a software designer. Not all IT staff fit the MIS profile.
However, I *agree* with you in regard to "I'm doing my job" and "I am a professional". That's what I was trying to say! Why would I want, as another poster said, a climbing wall at work? I'll go and pursue my leisure pursuits when I'm not at work. I don't care if you think Star Wars is best film ever made (and yes, I do have the videos) - I might agree, I might disagree, doesn't matter. It's got nothing to do with work! Decorating your cubicle with tradeshow posters - fine. Decorating your posters with one or two personal affects - fine. Annoying the shit out of co-workers trying to concentrate by firing nerf guns, and playing novelty tunes on your latest greatest mobile - not professional!
I've a love of a certain type of "geek" culture, the old fashioned tradition which originated in scientific labs and ham radio shacks. I like the idea of playing with the new toys to see what they do, I like the idea that if I want to know something I put the effort in and eat the books and specs, I like the idea of freely releasing what I've learned to help others. I like the iconoclastic ideal of being interested in interesting things and scorning those which are just to make money (ideally, the interesting things ARE those which make money). What I don't like is the recent trend of replacing the fiercely independent back room engineer image with the favoured self-image of
I think I just ranted again...
Maybe I'm weird. I don't want toys. My list:
1) Upper quartile pay for my work location and expertise.
2) Pension scheme.
3) Health insurance.
4) Bonuses/options.
5) No dress code.
6) Novel and interesting work domain.
7) Access to powerful development and test machines.
8) Choice of technologies for projects.
I know you're being funny...I hate this self-stereotyping of technical staff.
/., there's an opinion among many developers that the crowd here is nothing but a bunch of schoolkids with delusions of knowledge; don't feed them.
I don't want free sodas at work (I do like the subsidised canteen to be decent quality though), I don't want junk food, I don't want trash all over cubicle, I don't obsess about [Monty Python|Star Wars|LoTR], I don't want to fire Nerf Guns at fellow employees - I want to be treated like a mature professional doing a professional job.
I want money not some novelties scattered around the room. I want a quiet office, not a playpen. I agree that I want to know when the business is on the slide. I want influence and respect from people in suits. I want to be understood when I talk at project meetings. I want an understanding in the manager's head of why what I'm telling matters.
Tricking out your cubicle with action figures etc is just begging to be treated like a child. No wonder your boss seems like the PHB; to him/her you probably seem like a child. Or worse, a social misfit, a weirdo. Someone who's useful but fundementally unreliable.
Secondly, I don't see much "geek attitude" or reviews of Episode II trailers in mainstream trade journals (Dr Dobbs, Appication Development Advisor, Software Development) or in more seriously coding forums. In my experience, and I know this is pressing buttons, those who most loudly beg for ping-pong tables in work are those with the most inflated egos and least developed skills. Lets face it
I didn't like the tone of the interview; RMS came across as very idealistic, with a very "hippy" view. I know this is not how the whole story goes, but that's the impression this interview gives. I'd have liked to have seen some more concrete discussion of what benefits there are to business users, or home users. I'd have liked to see the word "monopoly" in there and discussion about how much software is costing various users, how free software would affect business models. Better yet, I'd have liked to have seen discussion of how free software has and is affecting several fields - academic, educational, scientific, server-farms. The man in the street doesn't know that other systems exist, some quick pointers to some prominent e-business sites or famous projects would setup association between "free software" and "good" rather than "free software" and what Cartman would call, "tree hugging hippy crap".
Unsure what the time delay mentioned above is about.
I assume the robots work in tandem with each other; being close to each other means minimal lag when co-ordinating the lighting. The only delay is transmitting pictures back of course.
Server seems to have tumbled over already so I can't check but it's interesting to consider what sort of lighting metrics they use - a human at home can say, "That's looks nicer lit like that." but what criteria should be used for autonomous work? Highest constrast? Smallest resolvable feature?
That's an interesting point - lichens and bacteria are highly unlikely to survive the journey (vacuum, extreme temperatures, radiation), but what about viruses? They're hardy little suckers, anyone know for sure what their limits are?
Given recent comments on here I'll bet Joel will appreciate a positive word or two!
(My opinion? Some good points, some bad points. He's very much a shrink-wrap developer.)
Thanks for the pointers, however, it's still not a viable option for me to run downtown (in the UK) and return with a Windowless computer.
Everything I can buy on the highstreet is either a Mac or a Windows PC. While I realise that there are tailored services they suffer from one problem - I can't walk in and ask for help. Remember I don't know what I want. I wouldn't know DDR if it bit me.
All I want is a no-frills, quiet PC that I can slap Linux and a few compilers onto to play. I'm not stupid, I'm a professional programmer. What type of power-supply I want is as relevant to me as it is to my Dad. I don't want to know, I want someone to help me out by selling me something.
And no, I don't just like to complain.
I've hit the same problem; I'm a software person, always have been, always will be. I can't build my own machine without help, but I know more than the average consumer in as much as I don't want to pay for a DVD drive, speakers, fancy keyboard etc. I want the box. In the same way that I don't need speakers I don't need, or want, WindowsXP. Can I find anywhere that is selling commodity PC, as opposed to commodity Windows boxes? Nope.
That's the number one core argument for competition. Why must I pay for a product I do not want?
I disagree.
I work a large telecommunications company which
has been crushed by the past year. The dotcom
implosion was predicted and it's a very different
world for a technologist post-that. I don't see
9-11 having an impact on my job or the IT market
as a whole. In fact, the increased international tension
has further damaged economies already shaky from the dotcom bust.
There is no new boom. There can't be and there
won't be. There will be a very slow and steady
growth; the assets which need to shift first to
revive the industry are telecommunications based.
They're expensive. $10s of millions expensive.
Committing to such projects takes time. Consumers
cannot drive the demand for new net services,
not in the same way the can for other commodity
goods. There must be framework. It's like wanting
new trains. You simply don't get startup railroads,
who can afford the track?
What many IT folks miss is that much of the
industry we're in is invisible. Consumers don't
know what I do, or why my job is needed. All they
know is that the internet is still slow, TV is
still TV and that most of those new fangled
interactive services are too expensive and trivial
to bother with. IT cannot sustain growth with the
consumer need, and, with my consumer hat on,
I'm not prepared to pay through the nose for
broadband, don't like interactive TV and haven't
got a PDA/laptop etc. Without this low level demand
and we're in a minor global depression remember,
there will be no significant IT recovery for a
few years. No months, years. 5-10. No boom,
just steady industrial scale growth, like everyone
else.
Sorry people, but in case you haven't noticed, society has, at least since the industrial revolution, been falling apart. You don't read a lot of history books do you? Because what you've written is nonsense.
How many people complaining about the RIP in this thread wrote to their MP over the issue? (I did.)
Do people still use Usenet?! Yes. A lot. I check through Usenet on a daily basis, just after I check Slashdot. The difference is that it's extremely rare that I try to follow a discussion here - it's slow and very clumsy using a web message board compared to a Usenet group and Usenet reader. (s/moderation/killfile/ for example) For what it's worth I object to Deja sticking adverts in my posts. I am happy for my posts to be archived provided they're reproduced as I originally intended. Adding ads violates that as I understand the legal discussions I've been following on usenet... which was better informed (seemingly) than that I've read here.
"No, you'll have programmers who understand the whole system"
You will? I've been in my current job for 14 months, and I still don't even understand my own subsystem (40+K of C++ involved with network management systems and multiplexers).
The whole system here is just under a MLOC of complex code. (Okay, so it's legacy, but aren't
most systems? Especially those where you need to turn things on their heads to meet new pressures)
We rotate staff frequently, in 14 months we've had 13 people leave (mostly internal transfers). That's bad for a team which has about 7 developers (plus 3 integration/test people).
Swapping people doesn't work. Learning time soaks up any and all advantage in bringing in even highly experienced people.
Aside from that much of the XP rules are okay, but not shockingly novel. I've been pair programming and constantly peer reviewing for months, it helps, but the single most important thing on a big project isn't mentioned in the XP book (skimmed it only so far) - source control.