I'd love to work for DARPA, but I'm sure I'd get paid much more working for Boeing or Lockheed or some such contractor which actually develops many of DARPA's projects. The UCAV Raptor (the unmanned drone plane), the Apache helicopter, airborne 100kW lasers, most missiles, every F-series fighter jet, and almost all bombers were developed by either Boeing or Lockheed (the B in B-52 stands for Boeing.) Besides that, (most) sub-contractors aren't associated with the stigma of government-financed evil like DARPA is.
Could someone please remind me how making programs easier to reverse engineer corresponds to being a better programmer? Tricksy is good in programs; it means that they can't fire you because you're the only one that understands the code.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd love to work for DARPA, but I'm sure I'd get paid much more working for Boeing or Lockheed or some such contractor which actually develops many of DARPA's projects. The UCAV Raptor (the unmanned drone plane), the Apache helicopter, airborne 100kW lasers, most missiles, every F-series fighter jet, and almost all bombers were developed by either Boeing or Lockheed (the B in B-52 stands for Boeing.) Besides that, (most) sub-contractors aren't associated with the stigma of government-financed evil like DARPA is.
Could someone please remind me how making programs easier to reverse engineer corresponds to being a better programmer? Tricksy is good in programs; it means that they can't fire you because you're the only one that understands the code.