Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas. To sue, your adult child would need documentation showing that they had a right to live in your house.
Too many parents these days want to be a "friend" to their children. That's all good, but respect is even more important. If you've taught them respect and hard work, you probably won't have to kick them out in the first place. But if you do have to, you won't have to go to court to make it happen!
Two young men in my own family had to be shown the door at some point. There was no court case. And later, they both thanked their parents.
Parents have to kick their adult children out of the house all the time. Most of them use much more sensible and less costly means. How about...changing the locks on the doors? That's just a couple hundred bucks.
OF COURSE parents should do this sort of thing with plenty of warning, but it's quite effective.
You mean, like, your cell phone? Or Google's Web site? Or Facebook? Or any other major Web site?
You are tracked everywhere. There is no privacy, even if you don't own a computer or cell phone. You are photographed dozens of times a day just by walking around!
Well, not quite. It did mistake several verbal phrases as commands or responses, which were apparently different from what the owner of the device intended. The "bug" isn't that it sent a message based on a verbal command, but rather, that it misunderstood what was being said.
Sure, and you can avoid car accidents by never driving a car.
Every technology comes with risks. For most of us, the benefits of smartphones far outweigh the risks of buying a smartphone that happens to be pre-installed with malware.
How about...waiting on hold for customer service! I'd pay for an automated service that does that for me!
And you think you do this a lot. Businesses hire whole teams of people who do nothing but wait on hold for customer service. Businesses such as medical billers who need to talk to someone at an insurance company. That's worth real money to them!
For $60 at Walmart, you can get a bread maker, where all you do is dump in the ingredients (wait, that part isn't automatic???), push a button, and two hours later you have fresh baked bread. All you have to do is take it out and slice it (not automatic either).
Maybe by some definition, bread makers are robots. These "robotic chefs" are robots by that same definition.
Hackers will always want the biggest bang for their buck, so they'll attack very popular routers. Who wants to bother with the product used by 5% of the population?
I don't know what you Mac people do, but in the Windows world, we use something called a docking station. This lets us have the portability of a laptop, such as for meetings, and also the comfort and usability of a desktop, such as dual screens and a real keyboard. My work laptop hardly ever gets opened, except when I take it to meetings.
In my experience, when you are using quality components, there is rarely a situation where the component has such an unavoidable flaw. At least, that's true in the Windows world. In the Linux world, I've encountered a lot more "half-done" components, where you have to do serious work to get it to perform as advertised. There seems to be something about component vendors wanting payment, that helps them focus on getting bugs out.
We're not really disagreeing. I said "...and I don't know how to...", you said "...you're not capable of..."
I didn't say anything about capabilities. My point was about current knowledge. I know the basic principles of LZW, and I also know that it's wise for me to use a library for that purpose, when my goal is to write end-user software. If you or I roll our own, the result will be crap. Now, if you or I work as part of a team that creates a Zip library, that's a different story, then it makes sense for us to educate ourselves in the intricate details of LZW.
Well, I can see you had some real struggles with XML! I don't understand what made it so evil, in your eyes, but that's probably because I don't understand much French.
You're right on all counts. A person who knows how the innards work, is better than someone who doesn't, all else being equal. Still, today's world is so specialized that no one can possibly learn it all. I've never built a processor, as you have, but I still have been able to build a DNA matching algorithm for a major DNA lab.
I would argue that anyone who can skillfully use off-the-shelf components can also learn how to build components, if they are required to.
LOL yeah I know it's all JSON now. I've been around long enough to see these fads come and go. Frankly, I don't see a whole lot of advantage of JSON over XML. It's not even that much more compact, about 10% or so. But the point is that the author laments the "bad old days" when you had to create all your own building blocks, and you didn't have a team of specialists. I for one don't want to go back to those days!
Yes, I agree with you on the "middle ground." My reaction was to the author's point that "not knowing how to build the components" was the same as being a "fake programmer."
If I'm a plumber, and I don't know anything about the engineering behind the construction of PVC pipe, I can still be a good plumber. If I'm an electrician, and I don't understand the role of a blast furnace in the making of the metal components, I can still be a good electrician.
The analogy fits. If I'm a programmer, and I don't know how to make an LZW compression library, I can still be a good programmer. It's a matter of layers. These days, we specialize. You've got your low-level programmers that make the components, the high level programmers that put together the components, the graphics guys who do HTML/CSS, and the SQL programmers that just know about databases. Every person has their specialty. It's no longer necessary to be a low-level programmer, or jack-of-all-trades, to be "good."
If I don't know the layout of the IP header, I can still write quality networking software, and if I know XSLT, I can still do cool stuff with XML, even if I don't know how to write a good parser.
OK, so yes, I know plenty of programmers who do fake it. But stitching together components isn't "fake" programming.
Back in the day, we had to write our own code to loop through an XML file, looking for nuggets. Now, we just use an XML serializer. Back then, we had to write our own routines to send TCP/IP messages back and forth. Now we just use a library.
I love it! I hated having to make my own bricks before I could build a house. Now, I can get down to the business of writing the functionality I want, instead of starting from scratch.
Just because you use components, doesn't mean you're not really programming. Trust me, if you're faking it, you won't succeed with components either.
No. Raw DNA results are standardized and compatible. The police could simply use the DNA data from their forensics lab, and upload it directly to GEDMatch. No genealogy Website needed to be involved other than GEDMatch (which was listed in the story).
This used to be true with older tests that only measured a few markers. But today's autosomal tests compare between 400,000 and 900,000 markers. When there's a close DNA match, there is no way you're not closely related. Sure, it might not be able to determine whether the match is your twin or your parent, but other forensic evidence can be used to exclude other close family members.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless there is a formal, signed lease between you and the child, you don't need a formal, signed eviction notice to kick them out. At least, you don't need such in Texas. To sue, your adult child would need documentation showing that they had a right to live in your house.
Too many parents these days want to be a "friend" to their children. That's all good, but respect is even more important. If you've taught them respect and hard work, you probably won't have to kick them out in the first place. But if you do have to, you won't have to go to court to make it happen!
Two young men in my own family had to be shown the door at some point. There was no court case. And later, they both thanked their parents.
Parents have to kick their adult children out of the house all the time. Most of them use much more sensible and less costly means. How about...changing the locks on the doors? That's just a couple hundred bucks.
OF COURSE parents should do this sort of thing with plenty of warning, but it's quite effective.
You mean, like, your cell phone? Or Google's Web site? Or Facebook? Or any other major Web site?
You are tracked everywhere. There is no privacy, even if you don't own a computer or cell phone. You are photographed dozens of times a day just by walking around!
Well, not quite. It did mistake several verbal phrases as commands or responses, which were apparently different from what the owner of the device intended. The "bug" isn't that it sent a message based on a verbal command, but rather, that it misunderstood what was being said.
Sure, and you can avoid car accidents by never driving a car.
Every technology comes with risks. For most of us, the benefits of smartphones far outweigh the risks of buying a smartphone that happens to be pre-installed with malware.
Oh, but they DO have support for their customers. No, not you and I, but their advertising customers. We're just the product, remember?
I think I saw this in the National Enquirer last time I was in a grocery store, so it must be true!
How about...waiting on hold for customer service! I'd pay for an automated service that does that for me!
And you think you do this a lot. Businesses hire whole teams of people who do nothing but wait on hold for customer service. Businesses such as medical billers who need to talk to someone at an insurance company. That's worth real money to them!
EVERYBODY rigs demos. Everybody.
For $60 at Walmart, you can get a bread maker, where all you do is dump in the ingredients (wait, that part isn't automatic???), push a button, and two hours later you have fresh baked bread. All you have to do is take it out and slice it (not automatic either).
Maybe by some definition, bread makers are robots. These "robotic chefs" are robots by that same definition.
Hackers will always want the biggest bang for their buck, so they'll attack very popular routers. Who wants to bother with the product used by 5% of the population?
I don't know what you Mac people do, but in the Windows world, we use something called a docking station. This lets us have the portability of a laptop, such as for meetings, and also the comfort and usability of a desktop, such as dual screens and a real keyboard. My work laptop hardly ever gets opened, except when I take it to meetings.
...aren't quite high enough yet.
What could be more pointless than to have a job producing videos that everyone ignores?
How about
- Bellhops
- Free community newspaper editors
- Sign spinners
In my experience, when you are using quality components, there is rarely a situation where the component has such an unavoidable flaw. At least, that's true in the Windows world. In the Linux world, I've encountered a lot more "half-done" components, where you have to do serious work to get it to perform as advertised. There seems to be something about component vendors wanting payment, that helps them focus on getting bugs out.
We're not really disagreeing. I said "...and I don't know how to...", you said "...you're not capable of..."
I didn't say anything about capabilities. My point was about current knowledge. I know the basic principles of LZW, and I also know that it's wise for me to use a library for that purpose, when my goal is to write end-user software. If you or I roll our own, the result will be crap. Now, if you or I work as part of a team that creates a Zip library, that's a different story, then it makes sense for us to educate ourselves in the intricate details of LZW.
Well, I can see you had some real struggles with XML! I don't understand what made it so evil, in your eyes, but that's probably because I don't understand much French.
You're right on all counts. A person who knows how the innards work, is better than someone who doesn't, all else being equal. Still, today's world is so specialized that no one can possibly learn it all. I've never built a processor, as you have, but I still have been able to build a DNA matching algorithm for a major DNA lab.
I would argue that anyone who can skillfully use off-the-shelf components can also learn how to build components, if they are required to.
LOL yeah I know it's all JSON now. I've been around long enough to see these fads come and go. Frankly, I don't see a whole lot of advantage of JSON over XML. It's not even that much more compact, about 10% or so. But the point is that the author laments the "bad old days" when you had to create all your own building blocks, and you didn't have a team of specialists. I for one don't want to go back to those days!
For the record, XML was invented in 1997, you know, in the last century! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And we had a WinSock library in 1992. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yes, I agree with you on the "middle ground." My reaction was to the author's point that "not knowing how to build the components" was the same as being a "fake programmer."
If I'm a plumber, and I don't know anything about the engineering behind the construction of PVC pipe, I can still be a good plumber. If I'm an electrician, and I don't understand the role of a blast furnace in the making of the metal components, I can still be a good electrician.
The analogy fits. If I'm a programmer, and I don't know how to make an LZW compression library, I can still be a good programmer. It's a matter of layers. These days, we specialize. You've got your low-level programmers that make the components, the high level programmers that put together the components, the graphics guys who do HTML/CSS, and the SQL programmers that just know about databases. Every person has their specialty. It's no longer necessary to be a low-level programmer, or jack-of-all-trades, to be "good."
If I don't know the layout of the IP header, I can still write quality networking software, and if I know XSLT, I can still do cool stuff with XML, even if I don't know how to write a good parser.
OK, so yes, I know plenty of programmers who do fake it. But stitching together components isn't "fake" programming.
Back in the day, we had to write our own code to loop through an XML file, looking for nuggets. Now, we just use an XML serializer. Back then, we had to write our own routines to send TCP/IP messages back and forth. Now we just use a library.
I love it! I hated having to make my own bricks before I could build a house. Now, I can get down to the business of writing the functionality I want, instead of starting from scratch.
Just because you use components, doesn't mean you're not really programming. Trust me, if you're faking it, you won't succeed with components either.
No. Raw DNA results are standardized and compatible. The police could simply use the DNA data from their forensics lab, and upload it directly to GEDMatch. No genealogy Website needed to be involved other than GEDMatch (which was listed in the story).
This used to be true with older tests that only measured a few markers. But today's autosomal tests compare between 400,000 and 900,000 markers. When there's a close DNA match, there is no way you're not closely related. Sure, it might not be able to determine whether the match is your twin or your parent, but other forensic evidence can be used to exclude other close family members.